Palatal Vault Configuration and Its Influence on Intraoral Scan Time and Accuracy in Completely Edentulous Arches: a Prospective Clinical Study

Overview

Journal J Adv Prosthodont

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2024 Sep 2

PMID 39221418

Authors

Dina Mohamed Ahmed Elawady

Wafaa Ibrahim Ibrahim

Radwa Gamal Ghanem

Reham Bassuni Osman

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the influence of palatal vault forms on accuracy and speed of intraoral (IO) scans in completely edentulous cases.

Materials And Methods: Based on the palatal vault form, participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 10 each); Class I: moderate; Class II: deep; Class III: flat palatal vault. A reference model was created for each patient using polyvinylsiloxane impression material. The poured models were digitized using an extraoral scanner. The resultant data were imported as a solid CAD file into 3D analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018; Gom GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) and aligned using the software's coordinate system to determine its X, Y, and Z axes. Five digital impressions (DIs) of maxilla were captured for each patient using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the resultant Standard Tessellation Language (STL) scan files served as test models. Trueness was evaluated by calculating arithmetic mean deviation (AMD) of the vault area between reference and test files while precision was evaluated by calculating AMD between captured scans to measure repeatability of scan acquisition. The scan time taken for each participant was also recorded.

Results: There was no significant difference in trueness and precision among the groups ( = .806 and .950, respectively). Average scan time for Class I and III palatal vaults was 1 min 13 seconds and 1 min 37 seconds, respectively, while class II deep palatal vaults showed the highest scan time of 5 mins.

Conclusion: Palatal vault form in edentulous cases has an influence on scan time. However, it does not have a substantial impact on the accuracy of the acquired scans.

References

Siqueira R, Galli M, Chen Z, Mendonca G, Meirelles L, Wang H . Intraoral scanning reduces procedure time and improves patient comfort in fixed prosthodontics and implant dentistry: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2021; 25(12):6517-6531. PMC: 8475874. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-04157-3. View

Kim S, Donovan D, Blanchard S, Kowolik J, Eckert G . The relationship between acute otitis media and the anatomic form of the hard palate. Pediatr Dent. 2008; 30(1):9-14. View

Hack G, Liberman L, Vach K, Tchorz J, Kohal R, Patzelt S . Computerized optical impression making of edentulous jaws - An in vivo feasibility study. J Prosthodont Res. 2020; 64(4):444-453. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.12.003. View

Osman R, Alharbi N . Does the palatal vault form have an influence on the scan time and accuracy of intraoral scans of completely edentulous arches? An study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2022; 14(5):294-304. PMC: 9672697. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2022.14.5.294. View

Canullo L, Colombo M, Menini M, Sorge P, Pesce P . Trueness of Intraoral Scanners Considering Operator Experience and Three Different Implant Scenarios: A Preliminary Report. Int J Prosthodont. 2020; 34(2):250–253. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.6224. View

Mangano A, Beretta M, Luongo G, Mangano C, Mangano F . Conventional Digital Impressions: Acceptability, Treatment Comfort and Stress Among Young Orthodontic Patients. Open Dent J. 2018; 12:118-124. PMC: 5815028. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601812010118. View

Masri G, Mortada R, Hatoum K, Al Harbi N, Boulos P, Salameh Z . Evaluation of the Adaptation of Complete Dentures Fabricated Using Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Techniques. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021; 21(12):1384-1388. View

Pesce P, Bagnasco F, Pancini N, Colombo M, Canullo L, Pera F . Trueness of Intraoral Scanners in Implant-Supported Rehabilitations: An In Vitro Analysis on the Effect of Operators' Experience and Implant Number. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(24). PMC: 8706214. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10245917. View

Patzelt S, Vonau S, Stampf S, Att W . Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013; 144(8):914-20. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0209. View

10.

AlRumaih H . Clinical Applications of Intraoral Scanning in Removable Prosthodontics: A Literature Review. J Prosthodont. 2021; 30(9):747-762. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13395. View

11.

. The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94(1):10-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.03.013. View

12.

Chebib N, Kalberer N, Srinivasan M, Maniewicz S, Perneger T, Muller F . Edentulous jaw impression techniques: An in vivo comparison of trueness. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 121(4):623-630. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.08.016. View

13.

Jung S, Park C, Yang H, Lim H, Yun K, Ying Z . Comparison of different impression techniques for edentulous jaws using three-dimensional analysis. J Adv Prosthodont. 2019; 11(3):179-186. PMC: 6609757. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2019.11.3.179. View

14.

Schimmel M, Akino N, Srinivasan M, Wittneben J, Yilmaz B, Abou-Ayash S . Accuracy of intraoral scanning in completely and partially edentulous maxillary and mandibular jaws: an in vitro analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2020; 25(4):1839-1847. PMC: 7966190. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03486-z. View

15.

Russo L, Caradonna G, Troiano G, Salamini A, Guida L, Ciavarella D . Three-dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional impressions of edentulous jaws: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 123(2):264-268. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.04.004. View