Comparative analysis of peri-implant emergence profiles surface scans, using different scanning posts - Phase I

Authors

  • Antônio Sérgio Netto Valladão Centro Universitário de Valença - UNIFAA
  • Ana Luiza Pereira Terra Centro Universitário de Valença - UNIFAA
  • Isadora de Almeida Lozasso Vieira Centro Universitário de Valença - UNIFAA
  • Wallace Conceição Leal Clínica Mega Imagem
  • Monique Ferreira e Silva Centro Universitário de Valença - UNIFAA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24859/SaberDigital.2024v17n1.1487

Keywords:

CAD-CAM, gingiva, endosseous implants

Abstract

Objectives: Laboratory analysis of surface scans of peri-implant emergency profiles using different scanning posts.  Materials and Methods: Three MAV models were drilled using surgical guides and analogues of the Unitite Prime (SIN), Helix GM Narrow (Neodent) and TRI Bioneck (Dérig) implants were installed in models M1, M2 and M3 respectively, one analog per model. Each model was scanned with a specific scanning post, resulting in STL files, the images of which were used for visual analysis of the scanned emergence profiles. Results and Discussion: Visual analysis of the images from the STL files showed that the EPS (Emergence Profile Scanbody - Pat. Req. BR1020200019481), the GM Implant Intraoral Scanbody (Neodent, Brazil) and the TRI NP scanning transfer (Dérig, Brazil) enabled the respective emergence profiles to be scanned correctly. Conclusions: The three scanning posts used can achieve good clinical results when it is necessary to transfer the 3D positioning of the endosseous implant associated with copying the peri-implant emergence profile. The geometric analysis to be carried out in phase II of this study will be fundamental in verifying the superiority of one or other scanning post in capturing the peri-implant emergence profile. Further analysis is recommended for the emergence profiles of other dental elements, the use of other scanning posts and the performance of other intraoral scanners.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ABRAMS, L. Augmentation of the deformed residual edentulous ridge for fixed prosthesis. Compend Contin Educ, v.1, p.205-13, 1980.

ARCURI, L. et al. Influence of implant scanbody material, position and operator on the accuracy of digital impression for complete-arch: A randomized in vitro trial. J Prosthodont Res, v.64, p.128–36, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.06.001

BHAKTA, S. et al. Impressions in implant dentistry. Br Dent J. v.211, p.361-7, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.862

CAKMAK, G. et al. Comparison of measured deviations in digital implant scans depending on software and operator. J Dent, v.122, p. 104154, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104154

DONMEZ, M.B. et al. Scan accuracy and time efficiency of different implant-supported fixed partial denture situations depending on the intraoral scanner and scanned area: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.029

GARBER, D.A.; ROSENBERG, E.S. The edentulous ridge in fixed prosthodontics. Compend Contin Educ, v.2, p.212-23, 1981.

GHERLONE, E. et al. Conventional Versus Digital Impressions for “All-on-Four” Restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, v.31, p.324–30, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3900

GIMENEZ-GONZALEZ, B. et al. An In Vitro Study of Factors Influencing the Performance of Digital Intraoral Impressions Operating on Active Wavefront Sampling Technology with Multiple Implants in the Edentulous Maxilla. J Prosthodont, v.26, p.650–55, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12457

GOMES, E.A. et al. Moldagem de transferência de próteses sobre implante ao alcance do clínico-geral. Pesq Bras Odontoped Clin Integr, v.6, p.281-88, 2006.

IMBURGIA, M. et al. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: A comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health, v.17, p.92, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0383-4

IWAMOTO, M. et al. Investigating the implant position reproducibility of optical impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner and 3D-printed models fabricated using an intraoral scanner. Int J Impl Dent, v.9, p.1-10, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-023-00481-3

LOPES, A.; FERRO, A.; NUNES, M. The All-on-4 concept for full-arch rehabilitation of the edentulous maxillae: A longitudinal study with 5-13 years of follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, v.4, p.538-49, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12771

LI, J.; CHEN, Z.; WANG, M. et al. Dynamic changes of peri-implant soft tissue after interim restoration removal during a digital intraoral scan. J Prosthet Dent, v.122, p.288-94, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.07.020

MALÓ, P. et al. The All-on-4 treatment concept for the rehabilitation of the completely edentulous mandible: A longitudinal study with 10 to 18 years of follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, v.4, p.565-577, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12769

MIZUMOTO, R.; YILMAZ, B. Intraoral scan bodies in implant dentistry: A systematic review. J. Prost. Dent, v.120, p.343–52, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.10.029

NEDELCU, R. et al. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method. J Dent, v.69, p.110–8, 2018a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.12.006

NEDELCU, R. et al. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison. BMC Oral Health, v.18, p.27, 2018b. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0489-3

PAPASPYRIDAKOS, P. et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: Accuracy outcomes. Clin. Oral Implants Res, v.27, p.465–72, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12567

PEROZ, S. et al. Measured accuracy of intraoral scanners is highly dependent on methodical factors. J Prosthodont Res, v.66, p.318-25, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_21_00023

SILVA, M.M. et al. Técnicas de moldagem em prótese sobre implantes. Rev Odontol UNESP, v.37, p.301-8, 2008.

YILMAZ, H. et al. Effect of scan pattern on the scan accuracy of a combined healing abutment scan body system. J Prosthet Dent, 2022.

Downloads

Published

2024-03-13

How to Cite

Netto Valladão , A. S. ., Pereira Terra, A. L. ., de Almeida Lozasso Vieira, I. ., Conceição Leal, W., & Ferreira e Silva, M. (2024). Comparative analysis of peri-implant emergence profiles surface scans, using different scanning posts - Phase I. Revista Saber Digital, 17(1), e20241703. https://doi.org/10.24859/SaberDigital.2024v17n1.1487

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 1 (2024)

Section

Dentistry

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Saber Digital

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Declaração de Direito Autoral

Autores que publicam na Revista Saber Digital concordam com os seguintes termos:
Os autores mantêm os direitos e cedem à revista o direito à primeira publicação, simultaneamente submetido a uma licença Creative Commons que permite o compartilhamento por terceiros com a devida menção ao autor e à primeira publicação pela Revista Saber Digital.
Os autores podem entrar em acordos contratuais adicionais e separados para a distribuição não exclusiva da versão publicada da obra (por exemplo, postá-la em um repositório institucional ou publicá-la em um livro), com o reconhecimento de sua publicação inicial na Revista Saber Digital.

Licença Creative Commons
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/