Publications by authors named "Eung-Yeol Kim"
Article Synopsis
- - The study compared the accuracy of impressions taken of hypermobile teeth in partially edentulous dental arches using digital and conventional methods, assessing a mandibular model with three target teeth.
- - Results showed that digital impressions significantly outperformed hydrocolloid impressions for two of the three teeth tested, while the accuracy of digital and silicone impressions was similar.
- - The research concluded that using an intraoral scanner (digital method) is preferable for minimizing hypermobile tooth deviations compared to hydrocolloid impressions, with the accuracy varying based on the specific tooth's location.
Although digital impression using an intraoral scanner (IOS) has been applied for removable partial denture (RPD) fabrication, it is still unclear how the morphology of a residual ridge recorded by digital impression would differ from that recorded by conventional impression. This in vivo study investigated the morphological difference in the recorded residual ridge between digital and conventional impressions. Vertical and horizontal displacements (VD and HD) in residual ridges recorded by digital and conventional impressions were assessed in 22 participants (15 female; mean age 78.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: To verify the effect of abutment tooth location on the accuracy of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner (IOS) for removable partial dentures (RPDs).
Methods: The target abutment teeth included the left first premolar (#34), second molar (#37), and right second premolar (#45) in a mandibular Kennedy class II model and the left and right second molars (#37, #47) in a class III model. Only #37 was isolated from the remaining teeth by the mucosal area in both models.
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of scanning origin location on the data accuracy of removable partial denture (RPD) abutment teeth region in digital impressions acquired by an intraoral scanner. A mandibular partially edentulous model including the following target abutment teeth was used: the left second molar (#37); left first premolar (#34); and right second premolar (#45). The following scanning strategies were tested: the strategy starting from #37 to mesial direction (37M); strategies starting from #34 to mesial (34M) and distal directions (34D), and strategies starting from #45 to mesial (45M) and distal directions (45D).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF