Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
48th-Annual-Conference-of-the-EPA-2025 | 27. Bilimsel TPID Kongresi, Nevşehir, Türkiye, 11 - 13 Eylül 2025, cilt.1, ss.9, (Tam Metin Bildiri)
OBJECTIVES: Aim of this pilot study is to evaluate accuracy of digital impressions obtained from models with different finish line designs using a small sample group.Digital impressions will be acquired from teeth with identical morphology but prepared with various finish line types, and their trueness and precision (together representing overall accuracy) will be compared. MATERIALS-METHODS: Preparations with three different f inish line designs (shoulder, chamfer, knife edge) were performed on three teeth with identical morphology on phantom models. All three models were scanned using both intraoral scanner and model scanner to obtain digital data in Standard Tessellation Language (STL) format. Resulting STL files were compared using CloudCompare software. This software was used to calculate mean distance and standard deviation values. Mean distance value indicates trueness, while standard deviation value indicates precision. RESULTS: Mean distance values for finish lines were found to be 0.0000859419 (shoulder), 0.00418655 (chamfer), and 0.018287 (knife edge), respectively. Standard deviation values for finish lines were found to be 0.0213947 (shoulder), 0.0341955 (chamfer), and 0.0638342 (knife edge), respectively. When ranked from smallest to largest, both mean distance and standard deviation values followed order; shoulder, chamfer, knife edge. CONCLUSIONS: When accuracy of digital impressions was compared based on finish line design, shoulder finish line demonstrated highest accuracy, followed by chamfer and then knife edge, which showed lowest accuracy. Finish line design was found to have influence on accuracy of digital impressions. In this pilot study, STL files with shoulder finish line exhibited highest accuracy when compared using CloudCompare software. Keywords: Digital impression, tooth preparation, finish line design, three dimensional imaging, computer aided design (CAD), CloudCompare