A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: fopen(/var/lib/php/sessions/ci_sessionphbdujqkkb9kr1i3b930krihuko528ee): Failed to open stream: No space left on device

Filename: drivers/Session_files_driver.php

Line Number: 177

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_start(): Failed to read session data: user (path: /var/lib/php/sessions)

Filename: Session/Session.php

Line Number: 137

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 143

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3098
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: Attempt to read property "Count" on bool

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 3100

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3100
Function: _error_handler

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Influence of the implant scan body bevel location, implant angulation and position on intraoral scanning accuracy: An in vitro study. | LitMetric

Influence of the implant scan body bevel location, implant angulation and position on intraoral scanning accuracy: An in vitro study.

J Dent

Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, 1001 Fairview Ave N # 2200, Seattle, WA 98109, United States; Kois Center, Seattle, WA, United States; Researcher at Revilla Research Center, Madrid, Spain. Electronic address:

Published: June 2022

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to evaluate how the geometry of scan body bevel locations and the angulation of implants affect the accuracy of complete-arch implant digital scans.
  • Two groups of models with angled and parallel implant positions were created, and five different bevel orientations were tested to measure discrepancies in scans using digital devices.
  • Results revealed that the bevel's location and implant spacing significantly impacted accuracy, with the lingual position showing the least discrepancies and parallel implants outperforming angled ones in accuracy.

Article Abstract

Purpose: To assess the influence of the scan body geometry bevel location and implant angulation and position of complete-arch implant digital scans.

Material And Methods: Two definitive casts with 4 implant analogs placed parallel (P group) or angulated up to 30° (NP group) were fabricated. Five subgroups were created based on the scan body geometry bevel position: facial, mesial, distal, lingual, or random (F, M, D, L, and R subgroup). Casts were digitized using a laboratory scanner (reference) (7Series Desktop Scanner) and an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3). The implant position discrepancies between the reference and experimental scans were calculated. Data was analyzed using 3-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = .05).

Results: The scan body geometry bevel position (P < .001) and the inter-implant distance (P < .001) were shown as significant predictors of the linear discrepancies obtained. The L subgroup had a significantly lower discrepancy compared with the other subgroups. Implant angulation (P < .001), the scan body geometry bevel position (P < .001), and the inter-implant distance (P < .001) were all significant predictors on the angular discrepancies obtained.

Conclusions: The scan body geometry bevel location and implant angulation and position influenced the accuracy of the IOS tested. The lingual orientation obtained significantly better accuracy values compared with the other positions. The parallel implant analog position obtained better accuracy than the angulated positions. Lastly, the implant positioned in the dental arch where the intraoral digital scan was finished obtained significantly higher distortion than the contralateral implant.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104122DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

scan body
16
body geometry
12
geometry bevel
12
bevel location
8
location implant
8
implant angulation
8
angulation position
8
bevel position
8
implant
5
position
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!