Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mahmoud E. Elbashti, BDS, MSc, PhD/Mariko Hattori, DDS, PhD/Sebastian B.M. Patzelt, DMD, MSc, Dr Med Dent Habil, PhD/Dirk Schulze, DMD, MD, PhD/Yuka I. Sumita, DDS, PhD/Hisashi Taniguchi, DDS, PhD: Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of using an intraoral scanner to digitize edentulous maxillectomy defects. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 maxillectomy models with two defect types were digitized using cone beam computed tomography. Conventional and digital impressions were made using silicone impression material and a laboratory optical scanner as well as a chairside intraoral scanner. The 3D datasets were analyzed using 3D evaluation software. Results: Two-way analysis of variance revealed no interaction between defect types and impression methods, and the accuracy of the impression methods was significantly different (P = .0374). Conclusion: Digitizing edentulous maxillectomy defect models using a chairside intraoral scanner appears to be feasible and accurate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elbashti et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: