Scanning Devices
Conditions
Brief summary
This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of intra-radicular attachments fabricated by direct scanning using three different scanners in vivo. The primary outcome will be the accuracy of the fabricated attachments, while secondary outcomes will includepatient-reported comfort during procedure of taking intraradicular attachment conventional impression and direct scanning.
Detailed description
The fabrication of intra-radicular attachments is a critical step in restoring endodontically treated teeth. The accuracy of these restorations directly impacts their clinical performance, including retention, marginal fit, and long-term success. With advancements in digital dentistry, intraoral scanners (IOS) have become increasingly popular for direct scanning of intra-radicular preparations. However, the accuracy of these scanners varies depending on their technology, software, and clinical conditions
Interventions
DEVICE3 shape desktop scanner
Scanning of intra-radicular impression by desktop scanner
DEVICESHINING 3D intraoral scanner
Direct scanning of the intra-radicular canal by Intraoral scanner A
DEVICEPlanmeca Emerald S intraoral scanner
Direct scanning of the intra-radicular canal by Intraoral scanner B
Sponsors
October 6 University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
1. Patients aged 18-65 years. 2. Endodontically treated teeth requiring intra-radicular attachments. 3. Adequate oral hygiene . 4. Periodontally Compromised Teeth: When some teeth have reduced bone support but can still be maintained as overdenture abutments with proper treatment.
Exclusion criteria
1. Severely Compromised Remaining Teeth: If the remaining teeth have poor prognosis due to extensive decay or severe periodontal disease. 2. Severe Bone Loss Around Abutment Teeth: If the remaining teeth do not provide adequate support, they may fail early, leading to additional complications. 3. Severe Malocclusion: Where occlusal discrepancies make overdenture placement difficult. 4. Limited inter-arch Space: cann't accommodate the overdenture components. 5 . Poor Oral Hygiene: increase the risk of decay or periodontal issues in retained abutments.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | Immediately after scanning. | measure accuracy between the dimension of the prepared canal gained by intra-radicular impression and the dimension of the prepared canal directly by two different types of intraoral scanners |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient-reported comfort | Immediately after impression taking and scanning. | Patient-reported comfort (assessed via a Likert scale questionnaire) Scaled from 0-100 The highest score means excellent The lowest score means unsatisfactory |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed