Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12725
Title: Three-Dimensional Static Articulation Accuracy of Virtual ModelsPart II: Effect of Model Scanner-CAD Systems and Articulation Method
Authors: Yee, Sophia Hui Xin
Esguerra, Roxanna Jean 
Chew, Amelia Anya Qin'An
Wong, Keng Mun 
Tan, Keson Beng Choon 
Keywords: Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Dentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine
Coordinate measuring machine
model scanner systems
precision
static articulation accuracy
trueness
DIGITAL WORKFLOW
Issue Date: 1-Feb-2018
Publisher: WILEY
Citation: Yee, Sophia Hui Xin, Esguerra, Roxanna Jean, Chew, Amelia Anya Qin'An, Wong, Keng Mun, Tan, Keson Beng Choon (2018-02-01). Three-Dimensional Static Articulation Accuracy of Virtual ModelsPart II: Effect of Model Scanner-CAD Systems and Articulation Method. JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY 27 (2) : 137-144. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12725
Abstract: Purpose: Accurate maxillomandibular relationship transfer is important for CAD/CAM prostheses. This study compared the 3D-accuracy of virtual model static articulation in three laboratory scanner-CAD systems (Ceramill Map400 [AG], inEos X5 [SIR], Scanner S600 Arti [ZKN]) using two virtual articulation methods: mounted models (MO), interocclusal record (IR). Materials and Methods: The master model simulated a single crown opposing a 3-unit fixed partial denture. Reference values were obtained by measuring interarch and interocclusal reference features with a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). MO group stone casts were articulator-mounted with acrylic resin bite registrations while IR group casts were hand-articulated with poly(vinyl siloxane) bite registrations. Five test model sets were scanned and articulated virtually with each system (6 test groups, 15 data sets). STL files of the virtual models were measured with CMM software. dRR, dRC, and dRL, represented interarch global distortions at right, central, and left sides, respectively, while dRM, dXM, dYM, and dZM represented interocclusal global and linear distortions between preparations. Results: Mean interarch 3D distortion ranged from –348.7 to 192.2 μm for dRR, –86.3 to 44.1 μm for dRC, and –168.1 to 4.4 μm for dRL. Mean interocclusal distortion ranged from –257.2 to –85.2 μm for dRM, –285.7 to 183.9 μm for dXM, –100.5 to 114.8 μm for dYM, and –269.1 to –50.6 μm for dZM. ANOVA showed that articulation method had significant effect on dRR and dXM, while system had a significant effect on dRR, dRC, dRL, dRM, and dZM. There were significant differences between 6 test groups for dRR, dRL dXM, and dZM. dRR and dXM were significantly greater in AG-IR, and this was significantly different from SIR-IR, ZKN-IR, and all MO groups. Conclusions: Interarch and interocclusal distances increased in MO groups, while they decreased in IR groups. AG-IR had the greatest interarch distortion as well as interocclusal superior-inferior distortion. The other groups performed similarly to each other, and the overall interarch distortion did not exceed 0.7%. In these systems and articulation methods, interocclusal distortions may result in hyper- or infra-occluded prostheses.
Source Title: JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY
URI: https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/231440
ISSN: 1059941X
1532849X
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12725
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications
Elements

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
ScholarBank _3D Static Articulation_PART II.docxAccepted version1.24 MBMicrosoft Word XML

OPEN

Pre-printView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.