Abstract

Intraoral scanners (IOS) have been used to quantify tooth wear, but so far they have not been systematically validated for monitoring of tissue loss. The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate whether progression of tissue loss can be detected with an IOS and whether IOS values agree with those obtained with noncontacting profilometry (PRO) serving as a standard method. Model jaws were mounted in a phantom head positioned in a dental chair. Flattened areas were prepared on the non-load-bearing cusps of the first molars (model teeth; n = 16) in order to fix flat enamel samples with an experimental area and a reference area. After baseline PRO and IOS, the experimental enamel area was stepwise etched with 35% H<sub>3</sub>PO<sub>4</sub> gel (4 × 30 s and 4 × 15 s). After each etching, PRO and IOS was performed and the vertical tissue loss between the reference and experimental areas was measured, each at the same 3 measurement points. Furthermore, cupped cusps were simulated by stepwise preparation of the load-bearing cusps of the model teeth with a spherical diamond bur, and the maximum vertical depth after each preparation step was measured only by IOS. Trios3 (3Shape, Denmark), Carestream CS3600 (Carestream, USA) and an optical profilometer (MicroProf, Fries, Germany) were used to measure the flat areas of the enamel samples, whereas only IOS were used to measure curved surfaces on the load-bearing cupped cusps of the model teeth. The IOS data were analyzed with an external software (GOM Inspect, Germany) and with the respective internal IOS software. PRO revealed a mean (±SD) tissue loss of 17.1 ± 4.7 µm after 30-s etching steps and 10.1 ± 5.1 µm after the 15-s etching steps. IOS and software types were able to detect the progression of tissue loss after each etching step (p ≤ 0.001 each); Bland-Altmann plots revealed good agreement with PRO regardless of the order of tissue loss, and no systematic difference was found. Increasing cupped lesion depths were detected by all IOS, with no significant differences between IOS and analysis methods. IOS were able to detect small amounts of tissue loss under simulated clinical conditions and seem to be a promising tool for monitoring even initial erosive tooth wear.

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 call

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.