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.
Patients aged 18-65 years.
Endodontically treated teeth requiring intra-radicular attachments.
Adequate oral hygiene .
Periodontally Compromised Teeth: When some teeth have reduced bone support but can still be maintained as overdenture abutments with proper treatment.
Severely Compromised Remaining Teeth: If the remaining teeth have poor prognosis due to extensive decay or severe periodontal disease.
Severe Bone Loss Around Abutment Teeth: If the remaining teeth do not provide adequate support, they may fail early, leading to additional complications.
Severe Malocclusion: Where occlusal discrepancies make overdenture placement difficult.
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.
Crossover
3 shape desktop scanner
DeviceScanning of intra-radicular impression by desktop scanner
SHINING 3D intraoral scanner
DeviceDirect scanning of the intra-radicular canal by Intraoral scanner A
Planmeca Emerald S intraoral scanner
DeviceDirect scanning of the intra-radicular canal by Intraoral scanner B
Accuracy
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
Patient-reported comfort
Patient-reported comfort (assessed via a Likert scale questionnaire) Scaled from 0-100 The highest score means excellent The lowest score means unsatisfactory
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
