스캔바디 종류에 따른 임플란트 디지털 인상의 정확성 비교

Abstract

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant digital scan using compatible scan bodies with original scan bodies about the same implant fixtures. In addition, the accuracy of digital scan according to partial edentulous form was also compared.

Materials and methods : Each two implant fixtures(TSIII, Osstem, Busan, Korea) were inserted in the acrylic resin dentiform reproducing a partially edentulous mandible with left second premolar, first molar, second molar, right second premolar and right first molar. Digital images were obtained by taking digital impressions with a dental model scanner(S600 ARTI model scanner, Zirkonzhan, South Tyrol, Italy) after connecting the own digital scan bodies(ZBAD4231, Zirkonzahn, Gais, Italy) to the implant fixtures, and the images were used as those of the control group. Also digital images were obtained by taking intraroral scanner(Trios 2®, 3shape Dental Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark) with its own scan bodies and compatible scan bodies(Dio scan adapter 01, High Dental Korea, Seoul, Korea). This study was conducted categorized by major two experimental groups; Group T – The most posterior tooth(second molar) existed, Group NT – The most posterior tooth was missing, and each group was divided into four groups in detail; Group 1 – Connecting the its own scan body to the implant on the second premolar site, Group 2 – Connecting the its own scan body to the implant on the first molar site, Group 3 – Connecting the compatible scan body to the implant on the second premolar site. Group 4 – Connecting the compatible scan body to the implant on the first molar site. Digital images of four experimental groups were matched with those of the control group using the optimal matching algorithm of the 3D image analysis program(Geomagic Design X 2014; 3D systems, USA), and scanning errors were calculated. Independent two sample t-test was applied to assess the significance between two experimental groups (p<0.05).

Results : Average error values between the experimental groups and the control group in Group T1∼NT4 were 0.87±0.46 ㎛, 4.86±3.08 ㎛, 4.64±1.94 ㎛, 3.80±2.76 ㎛, 4.34±2.45 ㎛, 16.80±4.98 ㎛, 7.51±1.09 ㎛, and 12.96±3.74 ㎛ respectively. There were statistically significant differences with second premolar site according to scan body and differences according to presence or absence of the most posterior tooth.

Conclusion : The digital impression taking by a compatible scan body can be an alternative to an digital impression with its own scan body of implant fixture, because showing clinically acceptable errors. But it is recommended to use the scan body fabricated to the implant fixture because of reducing the acceptable errors of the prosthetic restoration.