MedPath

Accuracy of Conventional Impression Versus Intraoral Scanner in Capturing Three Different Nasal Defects

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Nasal Defect
Interventions
Device: Physical Impression
Device: Scanning using intraoral scanner without markers
Device: Scanning using intraoral scanner with markers
Registration Number
NCT06315621
Lead Sponsor
Cairo University
Brief Summary

For all participants, a conventional facial impression will be done using silicone material then poured and scanned using a desktop scanner which represented the control group (Group 1).

Group 2, involves nasal defects which will be optically scanned using IOS(medit 700 wireless) without facial markers Group 3 involves nasal defects which will be optically scanned using IOS(medit 700 wireless) with facial markers.

STL files of the facial scans and scanned cast obtained from the impression will be exported and saved to be used later for outcome assessment.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
15
Inclusion Criteria
  • isolated nasal defects either, total or subtotal.
  • congenitally missing external nose with healthy and intact remaining facial structures.
Read More
Exclusion Criteria
  • Any debilitating medical condition.
Read More

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Physical impressionPhysical Impression-
Scanning using intraoral scanner without markersScanning using intraoral scanner without markers-
Scanning using Intraoral scanner with markersScanning using intraoral scanner with markers-
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Dimensional accuracy of intraoral scannersDay 0

measuring dimensional accuracy of diffrent scanning techniques using intraoral scanners

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Cairo University

🇪🇬

Cairo, Egypt

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath