Genauigkeit eines scanbaren Materials für Durchbissregistrate im teildigitalen Workflow

Zusammenfassung

Digitale Prozessketten sind heute fester Bestandteil moderner Zahnmedizin und können bei komplexen Versorgungen mit konventionellen Abläufen zu teildigitalen Workflows kombiniert werden. Durchbissregistrate eignen sich dabei für die Modellzuordnung im Artikulator. Ziel dieser Studie war es, ein scanbares Bissnahmesilikon (Registrado Scan [RS], VOCO GmbH) und Vergleichsmaterialien (Registrado Xtra [RX] und Registrado Clear [RC], VOCO GmbH) hinsichtlich der Genauigkeit zu untersuchen. Dafür wurden bei insgesamt 40 Proband*innen Registrate durchgeführt, und mittels farbsensitivem Intraoralscan wurden intraorale angefärbte Kontakte als Referenz dokumentiert. Ober- und Unterkiefermodelle der Proband*innen wurden im Artikulator in Okklusion gebracht und digitalisiert. Die Abweichung der sich ergebenden Kontaktpunkte auf den Modellen zur intraoral erhobenen Referenz wurde in einer 3-D-Software vermessen.

Es konnte gezeigt werden, dass sich die Werte in den Gruppen RS (0,52 ± 0,56 mm), RX (0,55 ± 0,53 mm) und RC (0,58 ± 0,53 mm) nicht signifikant voneinander unterscheiden (p ≥ 0,136). Das scanbare Material kann demnach sowohl in volldigitalen, in teildigitalen und auch in konventionellen Workflows angewendet werden.

Abstract

Today, digital workflows are an integral part of modern dentistry and can be combined with conventional procedures to create partially digital workflows for complex restorations. Through-bite registrations are suitable for model assignment in the articulator. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of a scannable bite registration silicone (Registrado Scan [RS], VOCO GmbH) and comparative materials (Registrado Xtra [RX] and Registrado Clear [RC], VOCO GmbH). For this purpose, registrations were made in a total of 40 subjects. Further intraoral marked contacts were documented as a reference by color-sensitive intraoral scanning. The upper and lower jaw models of the test persons were brought into occlusion in the articulator and digitized. The deviation of the resulting contact points on the models from the intraoral reference was measured in 3D software.

It was shown that the values in the groups RS (0.52 ± 0.56 mm), RX (0.55 ± 0.53 mm) and RC (0.58 ± 0.53 mm) were not significantly different from each other (p ≥ 0.136). Accordingly, the scannable material can be applied in fully digital, in partially digital and also in conventional workflows.

Schlüsselwörter

teildigitaler Workflow - Durchbissregistrate - 3-D-Messung

Keywords

partially digital workflow - through bite registration - 3D analysis

Publication History

Article published online:
04 January 2022

• Literatur

• 1 Joda T, Zarone F, Ferrari M. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 124 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0415-0. (PMID: 28927393)
• 2 Pott P, Stiesch M. Digitaler Workflow – computergestützt zur optimalen Patientenversorgung. Bayerisches Zahnärzteblatt 2017; 46-51
• 3 Michelinakis G, Aposolakis D, Kamposiora P. et al. The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review. BMC Oral Health 2021; 21: 37 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01398-2.
• 4 Christensen L. Digital workflows in orthodontics. J Clin Orthod 2018; 52: 34-44 (PMID: 29447129)
• 5 Colombo M, Mangano C, Mijiritsky E. et al. Clinical applications and effectiveness of guided implant surgery: a critical review based on randomized controlled trials. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 150 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0441-y. (PMID: 29237427)
• 6 Ibrahim El Meniawy O, Stiesch M, Pott P. Digitalisierung in der Zahnmedizin – Schnittstellen zwischen digitalen und analogen Abläufen. ZWR – Das Deutsche Zahnärzteblatt 2018; 217: 44-47
• 7 Nishiyama H, Taniguchi A, Tanaka S. et al. Novel fully digital workflow for removable partial denture fabrication. J Prosthodont Res 2020; 64: 98-103 DOI: 10.1016/j.por.2019.05.002. (PMID: 31229550)
• 8 Anadioti E, Musharbash L, Blatz M. et al. 3D printed complete removable dental prostheses: a narrative review. BMC Oral Health 2020; 20: 343 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01328-8. (PMID: 33246466)
• 9 Klering D, Eisenburger M, Stiesch M. et al. Die digitale intra- und extraorale Abformung. ZWR – Das Deutsche Zahnärzteblatt 2019; 128: 231-235
• 10 Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig 2013; 17: 1759-1764 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4. (PMID: 23086333)
• 11 Diker B, Tak Ö. Accuracy of six intraoral scanners for scanning complete-arch and 4-unit fixed partial dentures: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2021; DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.007. (PMID: 33558056)
• 12 Zeltner M, Sailer I, Mühlemann S. et al. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part III: marginal and internal fit. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 354-362 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.04.028. (PMID: 27677220)
• 13 Pyo S, Kim D, Han J. et al. Ceramic Materials and Technologies Applied to Digital Works in Implant-Supported Restorative Dentistry. Materials 2020; 13: 1964 DOI: 10.3390/ma13081964. (PMID: 32331379)
• 14 Gintaute A, Keeling A, Osnes C. et al. Precision of maxillo-mandibular registration with intraoral scanners in vitro. J Prosthodont Res 2020; 64: 114-119 DOI: 10.1016/j.por.2019.05.006. (PMID: 31387847)
• 15 Krahenbuhl J, Cho S, Irelan J. et al. Accuracy and precision of occlusal contacts of stereolithographic casts mounted by digital interocclusal registrations. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116: 231-236 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.029. (PMID: 27068319)
• 16 Pott P, Becker C, Schaumann S, Brune A, Bühnen L, Stiesch M, Eisenburger M. Vorstellung einer digitalen dreidimensionalen Messmethode zum Vergleich okklusaler Kontakte. Bonn: DGPro; 2019. Im Internet (Stand: 17.11.2021): https://www.dgpro.de/sites/default/files/uploads/dgpro2019_abstractband.pdf
• 17 Nishimori H, Iida T, Kamiyama H. et al. Comparing the occlusal contact area of individual teeth during low-level clenching. J Oral Sci 2017; 59: 337-342 DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.16-0453. (PMID: 28529279)
• 18 Utz K, Bernard N, Hültenschmidt R. et al. The reproducibility of arrow-point registration in full-dentition subjects depending on the recording material. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 1992; 102: 299-307 (PMID: 1598545)
• 19 Utz K, Müller F, Lückerath W. et al. Accuracy of check-bite registration and centric condylar position. J Oral Rehabil 2002; 29: 458-466 DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00864.x. (PMID: 12028494)
• 20 Ries J, Grünler C, Wichmann M. et al. Three-dimensional analysis of the accuracy of conventional and completely digital interocclusal registration methods. J Prosthet Dent 2021; 21 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.03.005.
• 21 Iwauchi Y, Tanaka S, Kamimura-Sugimura E. et al. Clinical evaluation of the precision of interocclusal registration by using digital and conventional techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2021; 21 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.01.021. (PMID: 33775391)