СРАВНИТЕЛЬНАЯ ОЦЕНКА ЦИФРОВЫХ И ТРАДИЦИОННЫХ ОТТИСКОВ В ОРТОПЕДИЧЕСКОЙ СТОМАТОЛОГИИ (ОБЗОР ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ)
Abstract
Точность окончательного оттиска напрямую определяет качество прилегания и долговечность несъёмной ортопедической конструкции. Наряду с традиционными эластомерными материалами всё более широкое распространение получают цифровые (оптические) оттиски, однако вопрос их сопоставимости с аналоговыми методами по точности, экономической эффективности, удобству для пациента и врача остаётся дискуссионным.
References
1. Taneva E., Kusnoto B., Evans C.A. 3D scanning, imaging, and printing in orthodontics // Issues in Contemporary Orthodontics / Bourzgui F. (ed). – London: Intech Open, 2015. – P. 862–877.
2. Nayar S., Mahadevan R. A paradigm shift in the concept for making dental impressions // Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences. – 2015. – Vol. 7, Suppl. 2. – P. S213–S215.
3. Mangano A., Beretta M., Luongo G. et al. Conventional vs digital impressions: acceptability, treatment comfort and stress among young orthodontic patients // The Open Dentistry Journal. – 2018. – Vol. 12. – P. 118–124.
4. Gracco A., De Stefani A., Bruno G. Influence of new technology in dental care: a public health perspective // International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. – 2023. – Vol. 20. – P. 5364.
5. Ender A., Attin T., Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions // The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. – 2016. – Vol. 115. – P. 313–320.
6. Ender A., Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions // Quintessence International. – 2015. – Vol. 46. – P. 9–17.
7. Abdel-Azim T., Zandinejad A., Elathamna E. et al. The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete-arch frameworks // The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. – 2014. – Vol. 29. – P. 1281–1288.
8. Anadioti E., Aquilino S.A., Gratton D.G. et al. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions // Journal of Prosthodontics. – 2014. – Vol. 23. – P. 610–617.
9. Lee S.J., Kim S.W., Lee J.J., Cheong C.W. Comparison of intraoral and extraoral digital scanners: evaluation of surface topography and precision // Dentistry Journal (Basel). – 2020. – Vol. 8. – P. 52.
10. Papaspyridakos P., Gallucci G.O., Chen C.J. et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes // Clinical Oral Implants Research. – 2016. – Vol. 27. – P. 465–472.
11. Dauti R., Cvikl B., Franz A. et al. Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with Lava C.O.S and conventional impression technique // BMC Oral Health. – 2016. – Vol. 16. – P. 129.
12. Almeida e Silva J.S., Erdelt K., Edelhoff D. et al. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques // Clinical Oral Investigations. – 2014. – Vol. 18. – P. 515–523.
13. Malaguti G., Rossi R., Marziali B. et al. In vitro evaluation of prosthodontic impression on natural dentition: a comparison between traditional and digital techniques // Oral & Implantology (Rome). – 2016. – Vol. 9. – P. 21–27.
14. Rödiger M., Schneider L., Rinke S. Influence of material selection on the marginal accuracy of CAD/CAM-fabricated metal- and all-ceramic single crown copings // BioMed Research International. – 2018. – Vol. 2018. – Art. 2143906.
15. Seelbach P., Brueckel C., Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow // Clinical Oral Investigations. – 2013. – Vol. 17. – P. 1759–1764.
16. Su T.S., Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression // The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. – 2016. – Vol. 116. – P. 362–367.
17. Yun M.J., Jeon Y.C., Jeong C.M., Huh J.B. Comparison of the fit of cast gold crowns fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression techniques // Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. – 2017. – Vol. 9. – P. 1–13.
18. Yuzbasioglu E., Kurt H., Turunc R., Bilir H. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes // BMC Oral Health. – 2014. – Vol. 14. – P. 10.
19. Gjelvold B., Chrcanovic B.R., Korduner E.K. et al. Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial // Journal of Prosthodontics. – 2016. – Vol. 25. – P. 282–287.
