Dimensional Accuracy Comparison of Physical Models Generated by Digital Impression/3D-Printing or Analog Impression/Plaster Methods

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the trueness and precision of physical models manufactured chairside (intraoral scanner and 3D printed) or by plaster models obtained using impression with alginate or addition silicone. A fullarch stainless steel die was impressed to obtain ten physical models for each group. The models were measured in a stereomicroscope, considering four linear distances. To assess the precision accuracy, an analysis of the measurement variability was carried out, identified by the coefficients of variation and by the Levene's test to compare the groups. To analyze trueness, the data average was subtracted from the database and compared considering alpha as 5 %. Considering precision, the higher dispersion of data occurred in the models obtained with silicone impression. And for trueness, Kruskal Wallis and Dunn tests results did not indicate differences between the groups in the anteroposterior linear distances (p> 0.05). Only in anterior transverse distance obtained through TRIOS (0.31 mm), it presented lower accuracy compared to the models from silicone impression (0.13 mm); however, at transverse posterior distance, the models from silicone impression showed the lowest accuracy (p <0.05). There was no difference between the models from scanning (p> 0.05). The physical dental models obtained by digital and analog workflows showed acceptable dimensional accuracy expressed by high precision and trueness. There is no difference between the evaluated intraoral scanner systems and the impression materials for the full-arch impression.

From Denture to the Final Implant-Supported Prosthesis Using a Full-Digital Protocol: A Dental Technique

“…Digital impressions with intraoral scanners in a digital workflow have been welldocumented in the literature as a suitable alternative to conventional impressions [1]. In this sense, virtual impressions can be easily performed, reduce visits to the dental office, are comfortable to the patient, can record the oral tissues without pressure, allow the correction of errors, and reduce the influence of dental material properties such as expansion, shrinkage, and distortion [2,3].…”

“…Although intraoral scanners can be used to digitally capture edentulous arches, they are usually difficult to use for inexperienced clinicians [3][4][5]. Errors in capture can generate distortion in the digital model, which can compromise the accurate fabrication of the prosthesis due to the failure in precisely replicating the implants' three-dimensional positioning and their relationship to the surrounding tissues [6,7].…”