Abstract
This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the 3D analysis for complete arch, half arch, and tooth preparation region by using four analysis software programs. The CAD reference model (CRM; N = 1 per region) and CAD test models (CTMs; N = 20 per software) of complete arch, half arch, and tooth preparation were obtained by using scanners. For both CRM and CTMs, mesh data other than the same area were deleted. For 3D analysis, four analysis software programs (Geomagic control X, GOM Inspect, Cloudcompare, and Materialise 3-matic) were used in the alignment of CRM and CTMs as well as in the 3D comparison. Root mean square (RMS) was regarded as the result of the 3D comparison. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference tests were performed for statistical comparison of four analysis software programs (α = 0.05). In half-arch and tooth preparation region, the four analysis software programs showed a significant difference in RMS values (p < 0.001), but in complete-arch region, no significant difference was found among the four software programs (p = 0.139). As the area of the virtual cast for 3D analysis becomes smaller, variable results are obtained depending on the software program used, and the difference in results among software programs are not considered in the 3D analysis for complete-arch region.
Highlights
In the color difference maps of half arch, blue color regions were shown on the incisal regions of anterior teeth, and red color regions were shown on the occlusal surfaces of premolars and first molar (Figure 4)
The Root mean square (RMS) values of half arch and tooth preparation were significantly different depending on the software program used (p < 0.001; Table 2), but no significant difference was found in the complete arch (p = 0.139; Table 2)
After the identical alignment method, the different RMS calculation methods in each software program had a significant effect on the RMS results (p = 0.007; Table 3), but the different alignment methods in each software program did not cause a significant difference in the RMS results (p = 0.701; Table 3)
Summary
Data enables the fabrication of a dental prosthesis that is more visual and accurate than those using a conventional workflow [5]. The conventional workflow for manufacturing dental prostheses requires the fabrication of physical dental casts, and impressions are taken using polyvinyl siloxane materials for teeth and soft tissues [5]. A dental prosthesis can be manufactured directly from a physical dental cast, or a partial digital workflow for manufacturing a dental prosthesis can be performed by acquiring a virtual cast using a desktop scanner [5]. The fully digital workflow directly scans teeth and soft tissues using an intraoral scanner and fabricates a dental prosthesis in a virtual cast without manufacturing a physical dental cast [1,2,3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
