FARKLI TARAMA YÖNTEMLERİNİN DİJİTAL ÖLÇÜ DOĞRULUĞUNA ETKİSİ: İN VİTRO ÇALIŞMA

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of different scanning procedures on digital impression truness. For this purpose, a typodont model was used in which the maxiallary right first molar and left second premolar was prepared.Digital data obtained with an industrial scanner (Atos II TripleScan) was used as a reference model. The model was scanned with three different intraoral scanners (Trios5, Trios4, Medit i500) (n=10). Digital impressions were divided into 5 groups for each system.First group: the entire arch was scanned once. Second group :the entire arch was scanned 3 times. Third group: the entire arch was scanned 10 times. Forth group: after the entire arch was scanned and locked, the prepared teeth were cut out and rescaned. Last group: after the entire arch was scanned and locked,the prepared teeth were cut out rescanned in HD mode. The reference data and the digital impression data of the intraoral scanners were matched with Geomagic Control X program and the impression truness was evaluated. R software (version 4.1.2) was used for the statistical analysis of the data. Differences between groups and scanners were analyzed using Friedman non-parametric test. For all analyses, the significance level was accepted as p<0.05. There was no significant difference between the scanning methods in the Trios 5 and Trios 4 along the entire arch. However, there were significant differences between the scanning methods within the Medit i500 between group A and group D, group B and group D. When we compared the effect of different scanning procedures on digital impression truness regionally, statistically significant differences were found between group D and group B for the Trios 5 in tooth number 16. However, there was no significant difference between the groups for Trios 4 and Medit i500. In the tooth area number 25, there were statistically significant differences between group B and group C, group C and group E for the Trios 5, while statistically significant differences were found between group A and group D, group B and group D for the Medit i500. For the Trios 4, there was no significant difference between the scanning groups .