3종의 스캔바디에 따른 디지털 인상 채득의 정확성을 평가한 결과 다음과 같은 결론을 내릴 수 있다.
디지털 인상 채득 시, abutment level에서 구강 스캐너로 인상 채득하는 것 이 fixture level에서 인상 채득하는 것보다 더 높은 trueness와 precision을 보여주었다. 그리고 abutment level에서 실리콘 인상 채득하여 제작한 석고 모형을 디지털 인상 채득하는 것은 fixture level에서 인상 채득한 것과 trueness와 precision에서 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 그리고 구강 스캐너 로 직접 스캔하는 것이 석고 모형을 스캔하는 것보다 더 우수한 precision을 보여주었다. 하지만 본 연구에서 보여준 모든 오차 값들은 임상적으로 허용 가능한 오차 범위였다. 그리고 fixture level에서 인상 채득 시 스캔 바디의 모양이나 크기에 따른 결과의 차이는 보여주지 않았다. 이와 같은 결과로 볼 때, 디지털 인상 채득 시 다양한 스캔바디에 따른 사용 적응증과 장,단점 및 발생할 수 있는 오차를 이해하고 다양한 임상 상황에 따라 이를 선택적으로 사용한다면 정확한 보철물 제작에 도움이 될 것으로 사료된다.
참 고 문 헌
1. Duret F, Blouin JL, Duret B. CAD-CAM in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;117:715-20.
2. Mörmann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc 2006;137:7S-13S.
3. Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J 2008;204:505-11.
4. Carr AB. Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-55.
5. Becker W, Becker BE, Newman MG, Nyman S. Clinical and microbiologic findings that may contribute to dental implant failure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:31-8.
6. Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:843-8.
7. Sones AD. Complications with osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:581-5.
8. Werner W, Stefan M, Stefan H, Matthias K. Bone loading caused by different types of misfits of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses:
a three-dimensional finite element analysis based on experimental results. Clin Oral Impl Res 2010;25:947-52
9. Burton JF, Hood JA, Plunkett DJ et al. The effects of disposable and custom-made impression trays on the accuracy of impressions. J Dent 1989;17:121-3.
10. Carr AB. A Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-55.
11. Barrett MG, de Rijk WG, Burgess JO. The accuracy of six impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthodont 1993;2:75-82.
12. Assif D, Fenton A, Zarb G. Comparative accuracy of implant impression procedures. Int J Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry 1992;12:112-21.
13. HeeJe L, Joseph SS, Hochstedler JL. The accuracy of implant impressions: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2008;100:285-91.
14. Clancy JM, Scandrett FR, Ettinger RL. Long-term dimensional stability of three current elastomers. J Oral Rehabil 1983;10:325-33.
15. Jamani KD, Harrington E, Wilson HJ. Rigidity of elastomeric impression materials. J Oral Rehabil 1989;16:241-8.
16. Christensen GJ. The state of fixed prosthodontic impressions: room for improvement. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136:343-6.
17. Johnson GH, Mancl LA, Schwedhelm ER, Verhoef DR, Lepe X.
Clinical trial investigating success rates for polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impressions made with full-arch and dual-arch plastic trays. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103:13-22.
18. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of fullarch scans using intraoral scanner. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:1687-94.
19. Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions:
efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Impl Res 2012;22:111-5.
20. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing. J Am Dent Assoc
2009;140:1301-4.
21. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1171-5.
22. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig.
2013;17:1759-64.
23. Zarauz C, Valverde A, Martinez-Rus F, Hassan B, Pradies G.
Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:799-806.
24. Abdel-Azim T, Zandinejad A, Elathamna E, Lin W, Morton D. The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete-arch frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:1281-8.
25. Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:3-12.
26. Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26:715-9.
27. Güth JF, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1201-8.
28. Moura RV, Kojima AN, Saraceni CHC, Bassolli L, Balducci I, Özcan M, Mesquita AMM. Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and
digital Impression techniques for implant Restorations. J of Prosthodont 2018:1.
29. Marghalani A, Weber HP, Finkelman M, Kudara Y, El Rafie K, Papaspyridakos P. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:574-579.
30. Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen CJ, et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: Accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;27:465–72.
31. International organization for Standardization. ISO-12836: Dentistry – Digitizing device for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations – test methods for assessing accuracy. International Organization for Standization. Geneva: Switzeland. 2012
32. Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:417-8.
33. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 2008;35:191-201
34. Wilk BL. Intraoral Digital Impressioning for Dental Implant Restorations Versus Traditional Implant Impression Techniques.
2015;36:529-30, 532-3.
35. Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B. J Intraoral scan bodies in implant dentistry: A systematic review. Prosthet Dent. 2018;120:343-352.
36. Kim KS, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Kwon HB, Yang JH, Lee JB, Yim SH.
Variation in the total lengths of abutment/implant assemblies generated