Issue Three 2018
2018, Vol. 5 issue 3, (September)
Digital and silicone impressions vs digital calipers
Our objectives were to evaluate and compare the reliability of digital and silicone impression measurements compared to direct manual measurement performed with digital caliper. Methods: 48 simulated lesions in the upper and lowers jaws of 6 porcine heads with were used. The jaws were digitized using intraoral scanner 3SHAPE TRIOS. Digitized 3-dimensional models were converted to individual stereolithography files and used with commercial software to obtain the diameter and depth measurements of each lesion. Manual measurements were carried out with a digital caliper. Silicone impressions were made for each jaw and lesion and scanned with IOS. One-sample t-tests and linear regression analyses were performed. To further graphically examine the accuracy of the different methods, Bland-Altman plots were used. Results: We found significant differences between the diameter Md+Mx measured with caliper and digitalized silicone impressions. There was fixed bias between depth Mx with IOS and digital caliper. Bland-Altman analysis showed fixed bias of one approach vs the other for the depths of lesions Fi3sh for both jaws. Conclusions: Intraoral scanner is proved to be a reliable method for linear measurements of simulated lesion in the jaws. Silicone impressions are not suitable for assessing accuracy of CBCT linear measurements.
Authors:Dora Kishkilova; Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Oral Diagnostic Faculty of Dentistry Medical University – Sofia;
Rosen Borisov; Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Oral Diagnostic Faculty of Dentistry Medical University – Sofia;