Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system
Purpose: To measure the impact of the scanning distance on the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans acquired by using a photogrammetry (PG) system. Material and methods: An edentulous cast with 6 implant abutment analogs was obtained. A brand new implant scan body was positioned on each implant a...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) |
| Repositorio: | Docta Complutense |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/109338 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/109338 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | 616.314-089.843 616.314-089.28 616-073.75 Accuracy Digital impression Implant scan Intraoral scanner Photogrammetry Odontología (Odontología) Ciencias Biomédicas Implantes dentales Prótesis dental Diagnóstico por imagen y medicina nuclear 32 Ciencias Médicas 3213.13 Ortodoncia-Estomatología 3213 Cirugía 3314.02 Prótesis 2209.90 Tratamiento Digital. Imágenes |
| Resumo: | Purpose: To measure the impact of the scanning distance on the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans acquired by using a photogrammetry (PG) system. Material and methods: An edentulous cast with 6 implant abutment analogs was obtained. A brand new implant scan body was positioned on each implant abutment and digitized using an extraoral scanner (T710; Medit) and the reference file was obtained. Three groups were created based on the scanning distance used to acquire complete-arch implant scans by using a PG (PIC System; PIC Dental): 20 (20 group), 30 (30 group), and 35 cm (35 group). An optical marker (PIC Transfer, HC MUA Metal; PIC Dental) was placed on each implant abutment and a total of thirty scans per group were acquired. Euclidean linear and angular measurements were obtained on the reference file was obtained and used to compare the discrepancies with the same measurements obtained on each experimental scan. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used to analyze trueness. The Levene test was used to analyze the precision values (α = 0.05). Results: Significant linear (P < .001) and angular trueness (P < .001) discrepancies were found among the groups. For linear trueness, Tukey test showed that the 20 and 30 groups (P < .001) and 30 and 35 groups were different (P < .001). For angular trueness, the Tukey test revealed that 20 and 30 groups (P = .003), 20 and 35 (P < .001), and 30 and 35 groups were different (P < .001) The Levene test showed no significant linear precision (P = .197) and angular discrepancies (P = .229) among the groups. Conclusions: The scanning distance influenced the trueness of complete-arch implant scans obtained with the PG method tested. The maximum linear trueness mean discrepancy among the groups tested was 10 µm and the maximum angular trueness mean discrepancy among the groups tested was 0.02 . |
|---|