摘要
目的比较数字化印模与传统压力印模制取的上颌牙列缺损模型的精确度,分析其影响因素。方法选取20例上颌牙列缺损患者(25个游离端,18个非游离端),使用数字化印模与传统压力印模制取上颌牙列缺损模型。数字化印模制取的牙列缺损模型通过口扫(TRIOS2,3Shape)获取;同一患者采用传统压力印模后灌注成石膏模型进行窗扫(先临三维),导出STL格式数字模型。两种数字模型在Geomagic Control X软件中分别进行以基牙作为标志点的转换拟合和最佳拟合,测量两种数字模型之间的总偏差(T),计算缺损区牙槽嵴顶近中(M)、中央(C)、远中(D)以及上腭部位点(P)位差,并比较游离端缺损区域与非游离端缺损区域的差异,结果采用独立样本t检验进行统计分析。结果以基牙作为标志点进行转换拟合时,两种数字模型之间的总偏差为0.03 mm,缺损区牙槽嵴顶M、C、D点以及上腭部位点(P)位差分别为0.47、0.65、1.48、0.07 mm。最佳拟合时,两种数字模型之间的总偏差为0.03 mm,缺损区牙槽嵴顶M、C、D、P点位差分别为0.50、0.66、1.43、0.08 mm。两种拟合方式之间没有显著性差异(P>0.05)。游离端缺损区与非游离端缺损区的比较结果显示,游离端缺损区的C、D位点偏差均值分别为1.07、2.38 mm,非游离端缺牙区为0.08、0.11 mm,游离端大于非游离端,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论数字化印模制取的上颌牙列缺损模型与传统压力印模制取的模型相比有较大偏差,特别是在游离端缺损区域中央及远中位点。
Objective To compare the accuracy of maxillary dentition defect models obtained by digital impression and traditional pressure impression,analyzing the influencing factors.Methods Twenty patients with maxillary dentition defects(25 free ends and 18 non-free ends)were selected.Digital impression and traditional pressure impression were utilized to fabricate models of maxillary dentition defects.Digital impressions were obtained through intraoral scanning(TRIOS2,3Shape).For the same patient,traditional pressure impression and perfusion plaster model were used for window scanning(SHINING 3D),and the resulting STL format digital model was exported.In Geomagic Control X software,conversion fit and best fit analyses were conducted on the two digital models using the remaining abutment as reference landmarks.The total deviation(T)between the two digital models was measured,and positional deviations of the alveolar crest in mesial(M),central(C),distal(D),and maxillary palate(P)regions of the defect area were calculated.A comparison was made between free end defect area and non-free end defect area,followed by statistical analysis using t-test.Results When the remaining abutments were utilized as reference points for conversion fitting,the total deviation between the two digital models was measured at 0.03 mm,while the positional deviations of M,C,D,P positions amounted to 0.47 mm,0.65 mm,1.48 mm and 0.07 mm respectively.In the best fitting,the total deviation between the two digital models was 0.03 mm,while the positional deviations of M,C,D,P,were measured to be 0.50 mm,0.66 mm,1.43 mm and 0.08 mm respectively.The two fitting methods exhibited no statistically significant distinction(P>0.05).The comparison results between the free end defect area and the non-free end defect area revealed that the mean deviations of C and D sites in the free end defect area were 1.07 mm and 2.38 mm,respectively,which exceeded those observed in the non-free end defect area(0.08 mm and 0.11 mm,P<0.05)with statistically significant differen
作者
胡帅
方晴
陆麒元
陶建祥
HU Shuai;FANG Qing;LU Qiyuan;TAO Jianxiang(Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Tooth Restoration and Regeneration&Tongji Research Institute of Stomatology&Department of Prosthodontics,Stomatological Hospital and Dental School,Tongji University,Shanghai 200072,China)
出处
《口腔医学》
CAS
2024年第6期433-437,共5页
Stomatology
基金
上海市卫生健康委员会面上项目(202340063)。
关键词
牙列缺损
可摘局部义齿
数字化印模
偏差
最佳拟合
dentition defect
removable partial denture
digital impression technique
deviation
best fitting
