Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Ahlholm, Pekka; Sipilä, Kirsi; Vallittu, Pekka K.; Jakonen, Minna; Kotiranta, Ulla

doi:10.1111/jopr.12527

Cited by 322 publications

(280 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

264

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…13 Also, several in vitro studies and reviews reported that the marginal and internal fit of 1 to 4 unit restorations obtained by optical impressions were comparable with those obtained by conventional impressions. 11,14–19 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9–19 This methodology evaluates the accuracy of the entire fabrication chain and not just the impression system. This fabrication chain includes many error prone steps beginning with optical scanning and the associated 3D model creation processes through all the stages of restoration fabrication (milling, 3D printing, casting) and postfabrication procedures (sintering, finishing, and polishing).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance

Atieh

Ritter

et al. 2017

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statement of problem Trueness and precision are used to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral optical impressions. Although the in vivo precision of intraoral optical impressions has been reported, in vivo trueness has not been evaluated because of limitations in the available protocols. Purpose The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of optical and conventional impressions by using a novel study design. Material and methods Five study participants consented and were enrolled. For each participant, optical and conventional (vinylsiloxanether) impressions of a custom-made intraoral Co-Cr alloy reference appliance fitted to the mandibular arch were obtained by 1 operator. Three-dimensional (3D) digital models were created for stone casts obtained from the conventional impression group and for the reference appliances by using a validated high-accuracy reference scanner. For the optical impression group, 3D digital models were obtained directly from the intraoral scans. The total mean trueness of each impression system was calculated by averaging the mean absolute deviations of the impression replicates from their 3D reference model for each participant, followed by averaging the obtained values across all participants. The total mean precision for each impression system was calculated by averaging the mean absolute deviations between all the impression replicas for each participant (10 pairs), followed by averaging the obtained values across all participants. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA (α=.05), first to assess whether a systematic difference in trueness or precision of replicate impressions could be found among participants and second to assess whether the mean trueness and precision values differed between the 2 impression systems. Results Statistically significant differences were found between the 2 impression systems for both mean trueness (P=.010) and mean precision (P=.007). Conventional impressions had higher accuracy with a mean trueness of 17.0 ±6.6 µm and mean precision of 16.9 ±5.8 µm than optical impressions with a mean trueness of 46.2 ±11.4 µm and mean precision of 61.1 ±4.9 µm. Conclusions Complete arch (first molar-to-first molar) optical impressions were less accurate than conventional impressions but may be adequate for quadrant impressions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance

Atieh

Ritter

et al. 2017

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently newer digital impression systems have proven to be more accurate for not only smaller cases but also larger and more complex cases when compared to conventional elastomeric impressions . Furthermore, digital impressions can be faster and shorten operation time compared to conventional elastomeric impression materials . In a double blind randomized clinical trial, direct digital impressions generated better fitting restorations compared to other traditional impression techniques .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a double blind randomized clinical trial, direct digital impressions generated better fitting restorations compared to other traditional impression techniques . Consequently, as digital impressions become more ubiquitous, accurate, and user friendly, their use is expanding to include larger and more complex clinical cases …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A novel technique for reference point generation to aid in intraoral scan alignment

Renne

Evans

Mennito

et al. 2017

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Composite resin dots on keratinized tissue were successful at allowing accurate merging of provisional restoration and post-preparation 3D models for the purpose of using the provisional restorations as a guide for final CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Composite resin dots placed temporarily on attached tissue were successful at allowing accurate merging of the provisional restoration 3D models to the preparation 3D models for the purposes of using the provisional restorations as a guide for final restoration design and manufacturing. In this case, they allowed precise superimposition of the 3D models made in the absence of any other hard tissue reference points, resulting in the fabrication of ideal final restorations.

show abstract

“…Equipped dentists are now using 3 rd generation optical cameras, yet conventional impression techniques are still being employed. The materials required for the latter technique have not followed the vast and rapid evolution of the optical cameras 4. Though still a little-known technique from just a few years ago, optical impression has quickly evolved and offers solutions for larger volume registration in different domains (prosthetics, implantology, orthodontics) 2…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptation of zirconia crowns created by conventional versus optical impression: in vitro study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSEThe aim of this study was to compare the precision of optical impression (Trios, 3Shape) versus that of conventional impression (Imprint IV, 3M-ESPE) with three different margins (shoulder, chamfer, and knife-edge) on Frasaco teeth.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe sample comprised of 60 zirconia half-crowns, divided into six groups according to the type of impression and margin. Scanning electron microscopy enabled us to analyze the gap between the zirconia crowns and the Frasaco teeth, using ImageJ software, based on eight reproducible and standardized measuring points.RESULTSNo statistically significant difference was found between conventional impressions and optical impressions, except for two of the eight points. A statistically significant difference was observed between the three margin types; the chamfer and knife-edge finishing lines appeared to offer better adaptation results than the shoulder margin.CONCLUSIONZirconia crowns created from optical impression and those created from conventional impression present similar adaptation. While offering identical results, the former have many advantages. In view of our findings, we believe the chamfer margin should be favored.

show abstract

Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Cited by 322 publications

References 18 publications

Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance

Accuracy evaluation of intraoral optical impressions: A clinical study using a reference appliance

A novel technique for reference point generation to aid in intraoral scan alignment

Adaptation of zirconia crowns created by conventional versus optical impression: in vitro study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About