Dataset Information

Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Due to the high prevalence of periodontitis, dentists have to face a larger group of patients with periodontally compromised dentitions (PCDs) characterized by pathologic tooth migration and malocclusion. Impression taking in these patients is challenging due to several undercuts and extensive interdental areas (IAs). The aim of this clinical trial was to analyze the ability of analog and digital impression techniques to display the IAs in PCDs. The upper and the lower jaws of 30 patients (n = 60, age: 48-87 years) were investigated with one conventional impression (CVI) using polyvinyl siloxane and four digital impressions with intraoral scanners (IOSs), namely True Definition (TRU), Primescan (PRI), CS 3600 (CAR), and TRIOS 3 (TIO). The gypsum models of the CVIs were digitalized using a laboratory scanner. Subsequently, the percentage of the displayed IAs in relation to the absolute IAs was calculated for the five impression techniques in a three-dimensional measuring software. Significant differences were observed among the impression techniques (except between PRI and CAR, p-value < 0.05). TRU displayed the highest percentage of IAs, followed by PRI, CAR, TIO, and CVI. The results indicated that the IOSs are superior to CVI regarding the ability to display the IAs in PCDs.

SUBMITTER: Schlenz MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7370147 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial.

Schlenz Maximiliane Amelie MA Schubert Victoria V Schmidt Alexander A Wöstmann Bernd B Ruf Sabine S Klaus Katharina K

International journal of environmental research and public health 20200630 13

Due to the high prevalence of periodontitis, dentists have to face a larger group of patients with periodontally compromised dentitions (PCDs) characterized by pathologic tooth migration and malocclusion. Impression taking in these patients is challenging due to several undercuts and extensive interdental areas (IAs). The aim of this clinical trial was to analyze the ability of analog and digital impression techniques to display the IAs in PCDs. The upper and the lower jaws of 30 patients (<i>n< ...[more]

PMID: 32630132

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThis in vivo study aims to assess the accuracy of the digital intraoral implant impression technique, the conventional closed-tray impression technique, and open-tray impression techniques in a standardized method of data segmentation along with the best-fit algorithm to overcome the inconsistency of results of previous studies regarding implant impression techniques.Materials and methodsSixteen implants were placed in eight patients. Each patient has undergone four impression techniques: direct intraoral scanning of the stock abutment, intraoral scanning using a scan body, conventional closed tray impression technique, and the conventional open tray impression technique. The conventional impressions were poured into stone casts with analogues and stock abutments and scanned using a desktop scanner. In intraoral scanning of the scan body, computer-aided design software was used for the replacement of the scan body with a custom-made abutment that is identical to the stock abutment, allowing comparison with the other impression techniques. The deviation in implant position between the groups was measured using special 3D inspection and metrology software. Statistical comparisons were carried out between the studied groups using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test.ResultsThe total deviation between groups was compared to the reference group represented by the intraoral scanning of the abutment. The total deviation was statistically significantly different (P = 0.000) among the different studied groups. The mean deviation was recorded as 21.45 ± 3.3 μm, 40.04 ± 4.1 μm, and 47.79 ± 4.6 μm for the intraoral scanning of the scan body, the conventional closed, and open tray, respectively.ConclusionFor implant impressions in partially edentulous patients, intraoral oral scanning using a scan body significantly improves scanning and overall accuracy. Regarding conventional impressions, the closed-tray impression techniques showed more accuracy than conventional open-tray impressions.Clinical relevanceIntraoral digital implant impression using scan body offers more accuracy than conventional implant impression techniques for recording posterior implant position in free-end saddle partially edentulous patients.

Project description:Hysterectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures for women of reproductive age. Laparoscopy was introduced in the 1990es and is today one of the recommended routes of surgery. A recent observational study showed that operative time for hysterectomy was significantly lower for 3-dimensional compared to conventional laparoscopy. Complication rates were similar for the two groups. No other observational studies or randomized clinical trials have compared 3-dimensional to conventional laparoscopy in patients undergoing total hysterectomy for benign disease. The objective of the study is to determine if 3D laparoscopy gives better quality of life, less postoperative pain, less per- and postoperative complications, shorter operative time, or a shorter stay in hospital and a faster return to work or normal life, compared to conventional laparoscopy for benign hysterectomy.The design is a randomised multicentre clinical trial. Participants will be 400 women referred for laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications. Patients will be randomized to 3-dimensional or conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. Operative procedures will follow the same principles and the same standard whether the surgeon's vision is 3-dimensional or conventional laparoscopy. Primary outcomes will be the impact of surgery on quality of life, assessed by the SF 36 questionnaire, and postoperative pain, assessed by a Visual Analogue scale for pain measurement. With a standard deviation of 12 points on SF 36 questionnaire, a risk of type I error of 3.3% and a risk of type II error of 10% a sample size of 190 patients in each arm of the trial is needed. Secondarily, we will investigate operative time, time to return to work, length of hospital stay, and - and postoperative complications.This trial will be the first randomized clinical trial investigating the potential clinical benefits and harms of 3-dimensional compared to conventional laparoscopy. The results may provide more evidence regarding the future place of 3-dimensional laparoscopy in the range of endoscopic approaches for benign hysterectomy.This study is registered at ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02610985 November 16th 2015. November 2015. The regional Ethical committee approved it on the 12. November 2015, approval number: SJ-498. Data handling was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency: REG-109-2015 on the 13. November 2015.

Dataset Information

Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial.

Publications

Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets