目的:准确性是评估数字印象质量的关键因素。本系统综述旨在评估口内扫描(IOS)获得无牙颌数字印象的准确性。
方法:本系统评价遵循系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)的首选报告项目,并在国际系统评价前瞻性注册(PROSPEROID:CRD42022382983)中注册。彻底检索了7个电子数据库,包括MEDLINE(PubMed),WebofScience,EMBASE,Scopus,科克伦图书馆,虚拟健康图书馆,打开灰色,到2023年9月11日。通过追踪纳入研究的参考列表进行滚雪球搜索。人口,干预,比较,这项系统评价的结果(PICO)问题是:“口腔内扫描在获得无牙弓的数字印象方面的准确性如何?”“非随机研究的改良方法学指数(MINORS)用于评估偏倚风险。
结果:在从数据库和手动搜索中检索到的研究中,共有25项研究入选本系统综述,包括9项体内研究和16项体外研究。纳入的研究中有21项使用了3D偏差分析方法,而4项研究采用了线性或角度偏差分析方法。体外研究的准确性结果表明,精确度范围为20-600μm,精确度范围为2-700μm。体内研究结果表明,真实范围为40-1380μm,而精度结果没有报告。
结论:根据本研究的结果,IOS的直接数字印象不能代替体内完全无牙弓的常规印象。IOS的无极数字印象在具有活动组织的外围区域显示出较差的准确性,比如软腭,前庭沟,和舌下区域。
Accuracy is a crucial factor when assessing the quality of digital impressions. This systematic
review aims to assess the accuracy of intraoral scan (IOS) in obtaining digital impressions of edentulous jaws.
This systematic
review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022382983). A thorough retrieval of 7 electronic databases was undertaken, encompassing MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Virtual Health Library, and Open gray, through September 11, 2023. A snowball search was performed by tracing the reference lists of the included studies. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) question of this systematic
review was: \"What is the accuracy of intraoral scan in obtaining digital impressions of edentulous arches?\" The Modified Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) was employed to assess the risk of bias.
Among the studies retrieved from databases and manual search, a total of 25 studies were selected for inclusion in this systematic
review, including 9 in vivo and 16 in vitro studies. Twenty-one of the included studies utilized the 3D deviation analysis method, while 4 studies employed the linear or angular deviation analysis method. The accuracy results of in vitro studies indicated a trueness range of 20-600 μm and a precision range of 2-700 μm. Results of in vivo studies indicated a trueness range of 40-1380 μm, while the precision results were not reported.
According to the results of this study, direct digital impressions by IOS cannot replace the conventional impressions of completely edentulous arches in vivo. Edentulous digital impressions by IOS demonstrated poor accuracy in peripheral areas with mobile tissues, such as the soft palate, vestibular sulcus, and sublingual area.