3shape Trios 3口内扫描和传统硅橡胶在牙体缺损修复中的失败原因分析

Analysis of the failure causes of 3shape Trios 3 intraoral scanning and traditional silicone rubber in the repair of dental defects

目的分析并比较3shape Trios 3口内扫描和传统硅橡胶在牙体缺损修复中的失败原因,为临床取模以及口内扫描仪性能改善提供参考依据。方法回顾性分析2021年1月至2023年10月实施口腔固定修复治疗并返工的200例患者为研究对象,以取模方式将其分为口扫组(n=97)和硅橡胶组(n=103)。口扫组给予3shape Trios 3口内扫描,硅橡胶组给予传统硅橡胶。比较两组在牙体缺损修复中的失败原因。结果两组的牙体缺损修复失败分布情况比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);口扫组中,龈下缺损修复失败占比高于龈上(P<0.05)。两组的龈下缺损修复失败原因比较,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论相较于传统硅橡胶,3shape Trios 3口内扫描在龈上缺损修复中更有优势,但在龈下缺损修复中,硅橡胶应用效果更佳。

Objective To analyze and compare the failure causes of 3shape Trios 3 intraoral scanning and traditional silicone rubber in the repair of dental defects,and to provide references for clinical mold extraction and performance improvement of intraoral scanner.Methods A retrospective analysis of 200 patients who underwent oral fixed repair and rework from January 2021 to October 2023 was conducted.The patients were divided into oral scan group(n=97)and silicone rubber group(n=103)by mold extraction.The oral scan group was given 3shape Trios 3 intraoral scan,and the silicone rubber group was given traditional silicone rubber.The failure causes of the two groups in the repair of dental defects were compared.Results There was a statistically significant difference in the distribution of dental defect repair failure between the two groups(P<0.05);in the oral scan group,the proportion of subgingival defect repair failure was higher than that of supragingival defect(P<0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in the causes of failure of subgingival defect repair between the two groups(P<0.05).Conclusion Compared with traditional silicone rubber,3shape Trios 3 intraoral scanning has more advantages in the repair of supragingival defects,but in the repair of subgingival defects,the application effect of silicone rubber is better.