Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

µÎ °¡Áö CAD softwareÀÇ ¸ÂÃãÇü Áö´ëÁÖ µðÀÚÀΰú Ãâ·Â¹° ÀÏÄ¡µµ ºñ±³

Comparative study of two CAD software programs on consistency between custom abutment design and the output

±¸°­È¸º¹ÀÀ¿ë°úÇÐÁö 2018³â 34±Ç 3È£ p.157 ~ 166
ÀÓÇö¹Ì, À̱Ժ¹, À̿ϼ±, ¼ÕÅ«¹Ù´Ù,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÓÇö¹Ì ( Lim Hyun-Mi ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
À̱Ժ¹ ( Lee Kyu-Bok ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
À̿ϼ± ( Lee Wan-Sun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ ÷´ÜÄ¡°úÀÇ·á±â±â°³¹ß¿¬±¸¼Ò
¼ÕÅ«¹Ù´Ù ( Son Keunbada ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇ°úÇаú

Abstract

¸ñÀû: µÎ °¡Áö CAD software¿¡¼­ °¢ softwareÀÇ ¸ÂÃãÇü Áö´ëÁÖ µðÀÚÀΰú Ãâ·Â¹°ÀÇ ÀÏÄ¡µµ¸¦ ºñ±³ Æò°¡ÇÑ´Ù.

¿¬±¸ Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý: 3Shape Dental System°úDelta9 CAD ¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÀÓÇöõÆ® ½Ä¸³ ¼®°í¸ðµ¨¿¡ ¸ÂÃãÇü Áö´ëÁÖ¸¦ µðÀÚÀÎÇÏ¿´´Ù(CRM STL file). µðÀÚÀÎÇÑ Áö´ëÁÖ¸¦ ¹Ð¸µ ÇÑ ÈÄ, Á¢ÃË½Ä ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î ½ºÄµÇÏ°í(Test STL file), Inspection ¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î¿¡¼­ °¢ Áö´ëÁÖÀÇ Test STL file°ú CRM STL fileÀ» ÁßøÇÏ¿© ¿ÀÂ÷°ªÀ» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: ½ÃÆíÀÇ Àüü ½ºÄµ ¿ÀÂ÷ ºñ±³¿Í Ãà¸é °æ»ç°¢¿¡ µû¸¥ Ãà¸éºÎÀ§ ¿ÀÂ÷ºñ±³¿¡¼­ Delta9ÀÌ ´õ ³ªÀº ¹Ð¸µ ÀçÇö¼ºÀ» º¸¿´´Ù(P < .05). ¸¶Áø¼³Á¤ ½Ã, ¹Ý°æ 0.9 mm¿¡¼­ Delta9ÀÇ µðÀÚÀΰú Ãâ·Â¹°ÀÇ ÀÏÄ¡µµ°¡ ´õ ¿ì¼öÇß´Ù(P < .05). ¹Ý¸é, Antirotation ÇüÅ ºÎ¿©¿¡ µû¸¥ À¯ÀÇÇÒ ¸¸ÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ºÎÀ§º° ¿ÀÂ÷ °ª ´©Àû ºñ±³¿¡¼­´Â Delta9ÀÌ ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ ½ÃÆí¿¡¼­ ´õ ÀÛÀº ¿ÀÂ÷ °ªÀ» º¸¿´´Ù(P < .05).

°á·Ð: Delta9ÀÌ ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ µðÀÚÀÎ ¼³Á¤ ȯ°æ¿¡¼­ 3Shapeº¸´Ù ´õ ÀÛÀº ¿ÀÂ÷ °ªÀ» º¸¿´´Ù. ÀÌ´Â Delta9À» »ç¿ëÇßÀ» ¶§, °èȹµÈ µðÀÚÀΰú Ãâ·Â¹°ÀÇ ÀÏÄ¡µµ°¡ 3Shape°ú À¯»çÇϰųª ´õ ÁÁÀº Ãâ·Â¹°À» ¾òÀ» ¼ö ÀÖÀ½À» ÀǹÌÇÑ´Ù.

Purpose: This study was aimed to compare the consistency between the custom abutment design and the output in two CAD software programs.

Materials and Methods: Customized abutments were designed by using 3Shape Dental System CAD software and Delta9 CAD software on a plaster model with implants (CRM STL file). After milling of the designed abutments, the abutments were scanned with a contact method scanner (Test STL file). We overlaid the Test STL file with each CRM STL file by using inspection software, and then compared the milling reproducibility by measuring the output error of the specimens from each CAD software program.

Results: The Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility than 3Shape when comparing the milling errors obtained with a full scan of all specimens (P < .05) and also when comparing the axial wall region specifically according to the axial angle. With 0.9 mm marginal radius, the Delta9 showed better consistency between the design and the output than 3Shape (P < .05). While, antirotation form had no significant difference in error between the two systems. When cumulative errors were compared, the Delta9 showed better milling reproducibility in almost cases (P < .05).

Conclusion: Delta9 showed a significantly smaller error for most of the abutment design options. This means that it is possible to facilitate generation of printouts with reliable reproducibility and high precision with respect to the planned design.

Å°¿öµå

CAD ¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î; ŸÀÌŸ´½ ¸ÂÃã Áö´ëÁÖ; ÀçÇö Á¤È®¼º; 3D Æò°¡
CAD software; titanium custom abutment; precise reproducibility; 3D evaluation

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI