Email Alert | RSS

Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2025, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (1): 121-127. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.01.018

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Evaluation of the accuracy of three-dimensional data acquisition from liquid- interference surfaces assisted by a scanner head with a compressed airflow system

Xinkai XU1, Jianjiang ZHAO2, Sukun TIAN2,*(), Zhongning LIU2, Xiaoyi ZHAO3, Xiaobo ZHAO4, Tengfei JIANG4, Xiaojun CHEN4, Chao MA4, Yuchun SUN1,2,*()   

  1. 1. Institute of Medical Technology, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China
    2. Center of Digital Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & NHC Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
    3. Department of General Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China
    4. Shining 3D, Hangzhou 311258, China
  • Received:2024-10-04 Online:2025-02-18 Published:2025-01-25
  • Contact: Sukun TIAN, Yuchun SUN E-mail:sukhum169@bjmu.edu.cn;kqsyc@bjmu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    National Key R&D Program of China(2023YFB4605400);the National Natural Science Foundation of China(52105265);the Beijing Natural Science Foundation(L232145);the Program for New Clinical Techniques and Therapies of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology(PKUSSNCT-23B04)

RICH HTML

   

PDF (PC)

Abstract:

Objective: To quantitatively evaluate the accuracy of data obtained from liquid-interference surfaces using an intraoral 3D scanner (IOS) integrated with a compressed airflow system, so as to provide clinical proof of accuracy for the application of the compressed airflow system-based scanning head in improving data quality on liquid-interference surfaces. Methods: The study selected a standard model as the scanning object, adhering to the "YY/T 1818—2022 Dental Science Intraoral Digital Impression Scanner" guidelines, a standard that defined parameters for intraoral scanning. To establish a baseline for accuracy, the ATOS Q 12M scanner, known for its high precision, was used to generate true reference values. These true values served as the benchmark for evaluating the IOS performance. Building on the design of an existing scanner, a new scanning head was developed to integrate with a compressed airflow system. This new design aimed to help the IOS capture high-precision data on surfaces where liquid-interference, such as saliva, might otherwise degrade scanning accuracy. The traditional scanning method, without airflow assistance, was employed as a control group for comparison. The study included five groups in total, one control group and four experimental groups, to investigate the effects of scanning lens obstruction, airflow presence, liquid media, and the use of the new scanning head on scanning process and accuracy. Each group underwent 15 scans, generating ample data for a robust statistical comparison. By evaluating trueness and precision in each group, the study assessed the impact of the compressed airflow system on the accuracy of IOS data collected from liquid-interference surfaces. Additionally, we selected Elite and Primescan scanners as references for numerical accuracy values. Results: The scanning accuracy on liquid-interference surfaces was significantly reduced in terms of both trueness and precision [Trueness: 18.5 (6.5) vs. 38.0 (6.7), P < 0.05; Precision: 19.1 (8.5) vs. 31.7 (15.0), P < 0.05]. The use of the new scanning head assisted by the compressed airflow system significantly improved the scanning accuracy [Trueness: 22.3(7.6) vs. 38.0 (6.7), P < 0.05; Precision: 25.8 (9.6) vs. 31.7 (15.0), P < 0.05]. Conclusion: The scanning head based on the compressed airflow system can assist in improving the accuracy of data obtained from liquid-interference surfaces by the IOS.

Key words: Intraoral 3D scanners, Compressed airflow system, Accuracy, Liquid-interference surfaces

CLC Number: 

  • R78

Figure 1

Scanning head improvement and usage A, conventional scanning head; B, new type of scanning head made by 3D printing; C, connection method between the new scanning head and the dental triple syringe; D, the scanning window is obstructed (shown in the red box)."

Figure 2

Construction of scanning models and feature shell design A, standard model; B, true value data obtained by ATOS; C, feature shell."

Table 1

Scanning groups and experimental condition settings"

Group Scanning scheme Scanning head Fluids Airflow
El Conventional Conventional NA NA
Pr Conventional Conventional NA NA
G1 Conventional Conventional NA NA
G2 New New type NA NA
G3 New New type NA Dental triple syringe
G4 New New type ddH2O NA
G5 New New type ddH2O Dental triple syringe

Figure 3

Schematic diagram of preparation for each group A, full arch group; B, half arch group; C, single crown group."

Table 2

Trueness of scanning for each group  /μm"

Group Sample size Full arch(↓) Half arch(↓) Single crown(↓) χ2 Pvalue
El 15 12.3(1.3) 10.2(2.0) 10.0(1.3)
Pr 15 26.5(7.6) 21.6(3.3) 8.1(1.2)
G1 15 18.5(6.5)aA 11.8(1.3)aB 11.1(1.1)aB 30.054 < 0.001
G2 15 19.2(7.0)aA 12.9(2.4)aB 12.8(2.3)aB 23.992 < 0.001
G3 15 22.4(8.5)aA 13.5(3.7)aB 10.9(1.1)aC 35.171 < 0.001
G4 15 38.0(6.7)bA 33.3(8.3)bA 30.1(13.2)bA 4.512 0.105
G5 15 22.3(7.6)aAB 12.6(2.7)aA 11.2(1.7)aB 35.238 < 0.001
χ2 31.495 40.382 40.731
P value < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001

Figure 4

Trueness deviation visualization color map"

Table 3

Precision of scanning for each group  /μm"

Group Sample size Full arch(↓) Half arch(↓) Single crown(↓) χ2 P value
El 105 11.1(1.8) 8.1(2.0) 5.5(0.8)
Pr 105 18.1(9.6) 9.2(3.1) 5.5(1.3)
G1 105 19.1(8.5)aA 9.5(2.6)aB 7.1(1.1)aC 247.988 < 0.001
G2 105 20.1(11.7)aA 11.0(3.0)bB 8.9(1.5)bC 232.264 < 0.001
G3 105 24.1(13.6)aA 10.3(3.7)bB 8.7(1.5)bC 229.115 < 0.001
G4 105 31.7(15.0)bA 20.6(9.2)cB 20.2(8.2)dC 115.474 < 0.001
G5 105 25.8(9.6)aAB 13.6(4.6)dA 10.0(2.4)bB 207.243 < 0.001
χ2 107.035 263.641 337.696
P value < 0.001 < 0.001 < 0.001

Figure 5

Precision deviation visualization color map"

1 Michelinakis G , Apostolakis D , Tsagarakis A , et al. A comparison of accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: A single-blinded in vitro study[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2020, 124 (5): 581- 588.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.10.023
2 Christopoulou I , Kaklamanos EG , Makrygiannakis MA , et al. Patient-reported experiences and preferences with intraoral scanners: A systematic review[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2022, 44 (1): 56- 65.
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjab027
3 Lione R , De Razza FC , Gazzani F , et al. Accuracy, time, and comfort of different intraoral scanners: An in vivo comparison study[J]. Appl Sci, 2024, 14 (17): 7731.
doi: 10.3390/app14177731
4 Shah N , Thakur M , Gill S , et al. Validation of digital impressions' accuracy obtained using intraoral and extraoral scanners: A systematic review[J]. J Clin Med, 2023, 12 (18): 5833.
doi: 10.3390/jcm12185833
5 Amornvit P , Rokaya D , Sanohkan S . Comparison of accuracy of current ten intraoral scanners[J]. BioMed Res Int, 2021, 2021, 2673040.
doi: 10.1155/2021/2673040
6 Oh KC , Park JM , Moon HS . Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the accuracy of intraoral scans: A new approach for assessing the accuracy of scanned data[J]. J Prosthodont, 2020, 29 (6): 518- 523.
doi: 10.1111/jopr.13158
7 Wesemann C , Kienbaum H , Thun M , et al. Does ambient light affect the accuracy and scanning time of intraoral scans[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2021, 125 (6): 924- 931.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.021
8 Chen Y , Zhai Z , Li H , et al. Influence of liquid on the tooth surface on the accuracy of intraoral scanners: An in vitro study[J]. J Prosthodont, 2022, 31 (1): 59- 64.
doi: 10.1111/jopr.13358
9 Kernen F , Schlager S , Seidel Alvarez V , et al. Accuracy of intraoral scans: An in vivo study of different scanning devices[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2022, 128 (6): 1303- 1309.
doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.03.007
10 An H , Mickesh GJ , Cho D , et al. Effect of finish line location and saliva contamination on the accuracy of crown finish line scanning[J]. J Prosthodont, 2024, 33 (1): 86- 94.
doi: 10.1111/jopr.13658
11 Rapone B , Palmisano C , Ferrara E , et al. The accuracy of three intraoral scanners in the oral environment with and without saliva: A comparative study[J]. Appl Sci, 2020, 10 (21): 7762.
doi: 10.3390/app10217762
12 Camcı H , Salmanpour F . Effect of saliva isolation and intraoral light levels on performance of intraoral scanners[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2020, 158 (5): 759- 766.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.03.022
13 孙玉春, 陈虎, 柯怡芳, 等. 一种获取牙预备体龈下边缘的口内三维扫描仪: CN217365798U[P]. 2022-09-06.
14 陈俊锴, 孙玉春, 陈虎, 等. 口内三维扫描仪扫描精度的定量评价方法研究[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2021, 56 (9): 920- 925.
doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20210130-00048
15 Nedelcu R , Olsson P , Nyström I , et al. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method[J]. J Dent, 2018, 69, 110- 118.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.12.006
16 Kihara H , Hatakeyama W , Komine F , et al. Accuracy and practicality of intraoral scanner in dentistry: A literature review[J]. J Prosthodont Res, 2020, 64 (2): 109- 113.
doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.07.010
17 Chiu A , Chen YW , Hayashi J , et al. Accuracy of CAD/CAM digital impressions with different intraoral scanner parameters[J]. Sensors, 2020, 20 (4): 1157.
doi: 10.3390/s20041157
18 Róth I , Czigola A , Fehér D , et al. Digital intraoral scanner devices: A validation study based on common evaluation criteria[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2022, 22 (1): 140.
doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02176-4
19 Kurz M , Attin T , Mehl A . Influence of material surface on the scanning error of a powder-free 3D measuring system[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2015, 19 (8): 2035- 2043.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1440-5
20 Park HN , Lim YJ , Yi WJ , et al. A comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanners using an intraoral environment simulator[J]. J Adv Prosthodont, 2018, 10 (1): 58- 64.
doi: 10.4047/jap.2018.10.1.58
21 Logozzo S , Zanetti EM , Franceschini G , et al. Recent advances in dental optics: Part Ⅰ: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry[J]. Opt Lasers Eng, 2014, 54, 203- 221.
doi: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2013.07.017
22 Kang SJ , Kee YJ , Lee KC . Effect of the presence of orthodontic brackets on intraoral scans[J]. Angle Orthod, 2020, 91 (1): 98- 104.
23 Humphrey SP , Williamson RT . A review of saliva: Normal composition, flow, and function[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2001, 85 (2): 162- 169.
doi: 10.1067/mpr.2001.113778
24 Song J , Kim M . Accuracy on scanned images of full arch models with orthodontic brackets by various intraoral scanners in the presence of artificial saliva[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2020, 2020, 2920804.
doi: 10.1155/2020/2920804
25 Patzelt SBM , Emmanouilidi A , Stampf S , et al. Accuracy of fullarch scans using intraoral scanners[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2014, 18 (6): 1687- 1694.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1132-y
26 Vág J , Nagy Z , Simon B , et al. A novel method for complex three-dimensional evaluation of intraoral scanner accuracy[J]. Int J Comput Dent, 2019, 22 (3): 239- 249.
[1] Hong LI, Feifei MA, Jinlong WENG, Yang DU, Binzhang WU, Feng SUN. Accuracy of dynamic navigation system for immediate dental implant placement [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2025, 57(1): 85-90.
[2] Yang YANG,Ting-ting PU,Li CHEN,Jian-guo TAN. Morphology accuracy evaluation of direct composite occlusal veneer using two types of modified stamp-technique [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 977-982.
[3] GUO Dan-ni,PAN Shao-xia,HENG Mo-di,QU Jian,WEI Xiu-xia,ZHOU Yong-sheng. Comparison of the registration methods for the three-dimensional facial scans applied to the design of full-arch implant supported restoration [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(1): 83-87.
[4] WANG Ying-chun,HUANG Yong-hui,CHANG Hong,YAO Wei,YAN Xiu-e,LI Ke,ZHANG Yao-peng,ZHENG Wei. Characteristics of benign and malignant lesions of ampullary polyps and the accuracy of forceps biopsy [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(1): 204-209.
[5] Di XU,Dong-hao WEI,Ya-chi ZHANG,Ping DI,Ye LIN. Effect of disinfectant with benzethon chloramine and isopropanol as main active ingredients on the accuracy of dental impression [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2020, 52(6): 1112-1116.
[6] Yue CAO,Jun-kai CHEN,Ke-hui DENG,Yong WANG,Yu-chun SUN,Yi-jiao ZHAO. Accuracy of three intraoral scans for primary impressions of edentulous jaws [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2020, 52(1): 129-137.
[7] ZHAO Yi-jiao, XIONG Yu-xue, YANG Hui-fang, WANG Yong. Evaluation of measurement accuracy of three facial scanners based on different scanning principles [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2014, 46(1): 76-80.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
Copyright © Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), All Rights Reserved.
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd