Method to evaluate the noise of 3D intra-oral scanner.

Publisher: Public Library of Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101285081 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19326203 NLM ISO Abbreviation: PLoS One Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science

Artifacts* ; Dimensional Measurement Accuracy*; Dental Impression Technique/*instrumentation ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/*methods ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional/*methods ; Photography, Dental/*methods; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/instrumentation ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional/instrumentation

In dentistry, 3D intra-oral scanners are gaining increasing popularity essentially for the production of dental prostheses. However, there is no normalized procedure to evaluate their basic performance and enable comparisons among intra-oral scanners. The noise value highlights the trueness of a 3D intra-oral scanner and its capacity to plan prosthesis with efficient clinical precision. The aim of the present study is to develop a reproducible methodology for determining the noise of an intra-oral scanner. To this aim, and as a reference, an ultra-flat and ultra-smooth alumina wafer is used as a blank test. The roughness is calculated using an AFM (atomic force microscope) and interferometric microscope measurements to validate this ultra-flat characteristic. Then, two intra-oral scanners (Carestream CS3500 and Trios 3Shape) are used. The wafer is imaged by the two intra-oral scanners with three different angles and two different directions, 10 times for each parameter, given a total of 50 3D-meshes per intra-oral scanner. RMS (root mean square), representing the noise, is evaluated and compared for each angle/direction and each intra-oral scanner, for the whole mesh, and then in a central ROI (region of interest). In this study, we obtained RMS values ranging between 5.29 and 12.58 micrometers. No statistically significant differences were found between the mean RMS of the two intra-oral scanners, but significant differences in angulation and orientations were found between different 3D intra-oral scanners. This study shows that the evaluation of RMS can be an indicator of the value of the noise, which can be easily assessed by applying the present methodology.

J Esthet Dent. 2000;12(2):78-84. (PMID: 11326507)
J Dent Res. 1955 Dec;34(6):849-53. (PMID: 13271655)
J Prosthodont. 2005 Dec;14(4):226-32. (PMID: 16359478)
J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Sep;137 Suppl:22S-31S. (PMID: 16950934)
J Dent. 2007 Jun;35(6):528-34. (PMID: 17418474)
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008 Apr;85(1):18-22. (PMID: 17618516)
Br Dent J. 2008 May 10;204(9):505-11. (PMID: 18469768)
PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e43312. (PMID: 22937030)
J Dent. 2014 Jun;42(6):677-83. (PMID: 24508541)
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Sep;112(3):555-60. (PMID: 24630399)
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Dec;112(6):1461-71. (PMID: 25134995)
Quintessence Int. 2015 May;46(5):401-7. (PMID: 25699295)
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:619027. (PMID: 26557681)
Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(4):343-67. (PMID: 26734668)
J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Aug;116(2):231-6. (PMID: 27068319)
Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Jun;21(5):1445-1455. (PMID: 27406138)
J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jan;117(1):93-101. (PMID: 27460324)
Materials (Basel). 2015 Jun 29;8(7):3945-3957. (PMID: 28793417)
J Am Dent Assoc. 1988 Nov;117(6):715-20. (PMID: 3058771)
J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995 May;32(2):141-8. (PMID: 7562654)

Date Created: 20170810 Date Completed: 20171003 Latest Revision: 20190115

20231215

PMC5549906

10.1371/journal.pone.0182206

28792965