Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study
BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL A...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Medical science monitor 2024-12, Vol.30, p.e946624 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | e946624 |
| container_title | Medical science monitor |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Jain, Saurabh Sayed, Mohammed E Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A Hakami, Ghada Ali J Solan, Eman Hassan M Daish, Manal A Jokhadar, Hossam F AlResayes, Saad Saleh Altoman, Majed S Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan Alqahtani, Saeed M Alamri, Mohammad Alshahrani, Ahid Amer Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad Mattoo, Khurshid |
| description | BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.12659/MSM.946624 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11636004</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3146570898</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c233t-52a43e403b05070daedc01065b09c7566574463a1b335bc15fd1fe3401ea20f83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUUtPGzEQtipQebSn3pGPSGhhvH5stpcqCqSNFARq2l4tr9dLjDb2YnuRculvr2kAwWlGmm--hz6EvhA4J6Xg9cX16vq8ZkKU7AM6JILRglYc9t7sB-goxnuAciKAf0QHtBaM84ofor9Trceg9Bb7DlO8cCkoH1SPV1o5Z0LE1uGfRvvQWneHF5shmBitdxF3PuD52Pd4GvQaXxqX8lsG9MqlYjUOgw_JtPg2-JjWJtr4FU9dVsB_bAoer9LYbj-h_U710Xx-nsfo9_zq1-xHsbz5vphNl4UuKU0FLxWjhgFtgEMFrTKtBgKCN1DrigvBK8YEVaShlDea8K4lnaEMiFEldBN6jL7teIex2eRn85Szl0OwGxW20isr31-cXcs7_ygJEVQAsMxw-swQ_MNoYpIbG7Xpc1rjxygpYdkFTOonsbMdVOfoMZjuVYeA_F-ZzJXJXWUZffLW2iv2pSP6Dxo3ko8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3146570898</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Jain, Saurabh ; Sayed, Mohammed E ; Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A ; Hakami, Ghada Ali J ; Solan, Eman Hassan M ; Daish, Manal A ; Jokhadar, Hossam F ; AlResayes, Saad Saleh ; Altoman, Majed S ; Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan ; Alqahtani, Saeed M ; Alamri, Mohammad ; Alshahrani, Ahid Amer ; Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad ; Mattoo, Khurshid</creator><creatorcontrib>Jain, Saurabh ; Sayed, Mohammed E ; Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A ; Hakami, Ghada Ali J ; Solan, Eman Hassan M ; Daish, Manal A ; Jokhadar, Hossam F ; AlResayes, Saad Saleh ; Altoman, Majed S ; Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan ; Alqahtani, Saeed M ; Alamri, Mohammad ; Alshahrani, Ahid Amer ; Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad ; Mattoo, Khurshid</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P<0.005) and trueness (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation values for precision and trueness (more accurate), followed by Medit i700 and Primescan intraoral scanners. However, deviation values of all scanners were within clinically acceptable limits.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1643-3750</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1234-1010</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1643-3750</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.12659/MSM.946624</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39645575</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: International Scientific Literature, Inc</publisher><subject>Computer-Aided Design ; Dental Arch ; Dental Implants ; Dental Impression Technique ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported - methods ; Humans ; Lab/In Vitro Research ; Mandible ; Models, Dental ; Software</subject><ispartof>Medical science monitor, 2024-12, Vol.30, p.e946624</ispartof><rights>Med Sci Monit, 2024 2024</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0003-1097-5218 ; 0009-0007-0591-3721 ; 0000-0003-1191-437X ; 0000-0002-1061-9574 ; 0009-0007-5631-7997 ; 0009-0008-9515-5991 ; 0000-0002-8496-184X ; 0000-0002-0071-4068 ; 0000-0002-5569-9133 ; 0000-0001-9669-2408 ; 0000-0001-8667-8987</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636004/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636004/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39645575$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jain, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sayed, Mohammed E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hakami, Ghada Ali J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Solan, Eman Hassan M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daish, Manal A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jokhadar, Hossam F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AlResayes, Saad Saleh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Altoman, Majed S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alqahtani, Saeed M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamri, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alshahrani, Ahid Amer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mattoo, Khurshid</creatorcontrib><title>Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study</title><title>Medical science monitor</title><addtitle>Med Sci Monit</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P<0.005) and trueness (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation values for precision and trueness (more accurate), followed by Medit i700 and Primescan intraoral scanners. However, deviation values of all scanners were within clinically acceptable limits.</description><subject>Computer-Aided Design</subject><subject>Dental Arch</subject><subject>Dental Implants</subject><subject>Dental Impression Technique</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lab/In Vitro Research</subject><subject>Mandible</subject><subject>Models, Dental</subject><subject>Software</subject><issn>1643-3750</issn><issn>1234-1010</issn><issn>1643-3750</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVUUtPGzEQtipQebSn3pGPSGhhvH5stpcqCqSNFARq2l4tr9dLjDb2YnuRculvr2kAwWlGmm--hz6EvhA4J6Xg9cX16vq8ZkKU7AM6JILRglYc9t7sB-goxnuAciKAf0QHtBaM84ofor9Trceg9Bb7DlO8cCkoH1SPV1o5Z0LE1uGfRvvQWneHF5shmBitdxF3PuD52Pd4GvQaXxqX8lsG9MqlYjUOgw_JtPg2-JjWJtr4FU9dVsB_bAoer9LYbj-h_U710Xx-nsfo9_zq1-xHsbz5vphNl4UuKU0FLxWjhgFtgEMFrTKtBgKCN1DrigvBK8YEVaShlDea8K4lnaEMiFEldBN6jL7teIex2eRn85Szl0OwGxW20isr31-cXcs7_ygJEVQAsMxw-swQ_MNoYpIbG7Xpc1rjxygpYdkFTOonsbMdVOfoMZjuVYeA_F-ZzJXJXWUZffLW2iv2pSP6Dxo3ko8</recordid><startdate>20241208</startdate><enddate>20241208</enddate><creator>Jain, Saurabh</creator><creator>Sayed, Mohammed E</creator><creator>Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A</creator><creator>Hakami, Ghada Ali J</creator><creator>Solan, Eman Hassan M</creator><creator>Daish, Manal A</creator><creator>Jokhadar, Hossam F</creator><creator>AlResayes, Saad Saleh</creator><creator>Altoman, Majed S</creator><creator>Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan</creator><creator>Alqahtani, Saeed M</creator><creator>Alamri, Mohammad</creator><creator>Alshahrani, Ahid Amer</creator><creator>Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad</creator><creator>Mattoo, Khurshid</creator><general>International Scientific Literature, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1097-5218</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0591-3721</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1191-437X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1061-9574</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5631-7997</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9515-5991</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8496-184X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0071-4068</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5569-9133</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9669-2408</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8667-8987</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241208</creationdate><title>Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study</title><author>Jain, Saurabh ; Sayed, Mohammed E ; Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A ; Hakami, Ghada Ali J ; Solan, Eman Hassan M ; Daish, Manal A ; Jokhadar, Hossam F ; AlResayes, Saad Saleh ; Altoman, Majed S ; Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan ; Alqahtani, Saeed M ; Alamri, Mohammad ; Alshahrani, Ahid Amer ; Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad ; Mattoo, Khurshid</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c233t-52a43e403b05070daedc01065b09c7566574463a1b335bc15fd1fe3401ea20f83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Computer-Aided Design</topic><topic>Dental Arch</topic><topic>Dental Implants</topic><topic>Dental Impression Technique</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lab/In Vitro Research</topic><topic>Mandible</topic><topic>Models, Dental</topic><topic>Software</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jain, Saurabh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sayed, Mohammed E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hakami, Ghada Ali J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Solan, Eman Hassan M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daish, Manal A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jokhadar, Hossam F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AlResayes, Saad Saleh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Altoman, Majed S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alqahtani, Saeed M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alamri, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alshahrani, Ahid Amer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mattoo, Khurshid</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Medical science monitor</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jain, Saurabh</au><au>Sayed, Mohammed E</au><au>Khawaji, Reem Abdullah A</au><au>Hakami, Ghada Ali J</au><au>Solan, Eman Hassan M</au><au>Daish, Manal A</au><au>Jokhadar, Hossam F</au><au>AlResayes, Saad Saleh</au><au>Altoman, Majed S</au><au>Alshehri, Abdullah Hasan</au><au>Alqahtani, Saeed M</au><au>Alamri, Mohammad</au><au>Alshahrani, Ahid Amer</au><au>Al-Najjar, Hind Ziyad</au><au>Mattoo, Khurshid</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study</atitle><jtitle>Medical science monitor</jtitle><addtitle>Med Sci Monit</addtitle><date>2024-12-08</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>30</volume><spage>e946624</spage><pages>e946624-</pages><issn>1643-3750</issn><issn>1234-1010</issn><eissn>1643-3750</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P<0.005) and trueness (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation values for precision and trueness (more accurate), followed by Medit i700 and Primescan intraoral scanners. However, deviation values of all scanners were within clinically acceptable limits.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>International Scientific Literature, Inc</pub><pmid>39645575</pmid><doi>10.12659/MSM.946624</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1097-5218</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0591-3721</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1191-437X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1061-9574</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5631-7997</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9515-5991</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8496-184X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0071-4068</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5569-9133</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9669-2408</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8667-8987</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1643-3750 |
| ispartof | Medical science monitor, 2024-12, Vol.30, p.e946624 |
| issn | 1643-3750 1234-1010 1643-3750 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11636004 |
| source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access |
| subjects | Computer-Aided Design Dental Arch Dental Implants Dental Impression Technique Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported - methods Humans Lab/In Vitro Research Mandible Models, Dental Software |
| title | Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T11%3A02%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Accuracy%20of%203%20Intraoral%20Scanners%20in%20Recording%20Impressions%20for%20Full%20Arch%20Dental%20Implant-Supported%20Prosthesis:%20An%20In%20Vitro%20Study&rft.jtitle=Medical%20science%20monitor&rft.au=Jain,%20Saurabh&rft.date=2024-12-08&rft.volume=30&rft.spage=e946624&rft.pages=e946624-&rft.issn=1643-3750&rft.eissn=1643-3750&rft_id=info:doi/10.12659/MSM.946624&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3146570898%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3146570898&rft_id=info:pmid/39645575&rfr_iscdi=true |