» Articles » PMID: 39130359

Correlation of Resin Composite Translucency and IOS Accuracy: An Study

Overview
Journal J Clin Exp Dent
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2024 Aug 12
PMID 39130359
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Different restoration materials have different optical characteristics that influence the intraoral scanner's (IOS) image accuracy. The purpose of this investigation was to investigate how composite translucency affected the accuracy of IOS.

Material And Methods: GC G-aenial Universal Injectable JE composite plates were used for the study at 3 thicknesses (1-2-3mm). A lab scanner (3Shape E1) obtained 1 reference scan, whereas IOS (Trios3) was used to conduct 10 experimental scans per group. After 3D superimposition, deviation values were used to assess the accuracy (trueness and precision) outcomes for the corresponding groups. Using an LS170 V2.0 colorimeter, the translucency parameter (TP) of the plates was determined from L*a*b* values of CIELAB color space.

Results: The composite translucency resulted in a decrease in the scale of digital impressions. The 1mm group had the largest scale reduction (0.02mm) significantly, followed by the 2mm and 3mm groups (0.01mm). No difference was found in mean precision. The colorimeter detects the L*a*b* values and showed that 1mm composite plate expressed the highest TP value, then 2mm and 3mm groups (28.90, 14.26 and 6.49 respectively). The thinner composite, the higher translucency and TP were highly positively correlated to IOS trueness of composite plates.

Conclusions: Composite translucency has an impact on optical impression accuracy. In correlation, the optical impression becomes less accurate the more translucent the composite is. This implies that in the digital process, the dentist should specify the appropriate optical properties of composite materials concerning both their mechanical and aesthetic qualities. Accuracy, translucency, resin composite, digital dentistry, intraoral-scanner.

Citing Articles

In-vitro accuracy of the virtual patient model with maxillomandibular relationship at centric occlusion using 3D-printed customized transfer key.

Nguyen A, Huynh N, Nguyen O, Nguyen N, Phan H, Kim J BDJ Open. 2025; 11(1):8.

PMID: 39890779 PMC: 11785937. DOI: 10.1038/s41405-025-00303-1.


Translucency and contrast ratio of dimetharcyrlate resin based dental materials after bleaching: an in-vitro study.

Akgul N, Yilmaz M BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):1564.

PMID: 39731149 PMC: 11681738. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-05383-3.

References
1.
Groten M, Axmann D, Probster L, Weber H . Determination of the minimum number of marginal gap measurements required for practical in-vitro testing. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83(1):40-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70087-4. View

2.
Revilla-Leon M, Subramanian S, Ozcan M, Krishnamurthy V . Clinical Study of the Influence of Ambient Light Scanning Conditions on the Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of an Intraoral Scanner. J Prosthodont. 2019; 29(2):107-113. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13135. View

3.
Dutton E, Ludlow M, Mennito A, Kelly A, Evans Z, Culp A . The effect different substrates have on the trueness and precision of eight different intraoral scanners. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019; 32(2):204-218. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12528. View

4.
Carneiro Pereira A, Curinga M, Segundo H, Carreiro A . Factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanning of total edentulous arches rehabilitated with multiple implants: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 129(6):855-862. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.09.001. View

5.
Diker B, Tak O . Comparing the accuracy of six intraoral scanners on prepared teeth and effect of scanning sequence. J Adv Prosthodont. 2020; 12(5):299-306. PMC: 7604233. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.299. View