Effect of different arch widths on the accuracy of three intraoral scanners

Abstract

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of three intraoral scanner (IOS) systems with three different dental arch widths. MATERIALS AND METHODS Three dental models with different intermolar widths (small, medium, and large) were attached to metal bars of different lengths (30, 40, and 50 mm). The bars were measured with a coordinate measuring machine and used as references. Three IOSs were compared: TRIOS 3 (TRI), True Definition (TD), and Dental Wings (DW). The relative length and angular deviation of both ends of the metal bars from the scan data set (n = 15) were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS Comparing among scanners in terms of trueness, the relative length deviation of DW in the small (1.28%) and medium (1.08%) arches were significantly higher than TRI (0.46% and 0.48%) and TD (0.33% and 0.18%). The angular deviation of DW in the small (1.75°) and medium (1.83°) arches were also significantly greater than TRI (0.63° and 0.40°) and TD (0.55° and 0.89°). Comparing within scanner, the large arch of DW showed better accuracy than other arch sizes ( P < .05). On the other hand, the larger arch of TD presented a greater tendency of angular deviation in terms of trueness. No significant differences were found in terms of trueness between the arch widths of TRI group. CONCLUSION The different widths of the dental arches can affect the accuracy of some intraoral scanners in full arch scan.

Evaluating the accuracy of CAD/CAM optimized stones compared to conventional type IV stones

“…Different devices such as analog or digital calipers, profile projectors, and microscopes have been to evaluate the accuracy of stone casts [26,27]. Some studies have reported that the accuracy of intraoral scans decreases with the increased length of the scanned model, which can result in registration problems of the overlapping images [14,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34].…”

A novel reference model for dental scanning system evaluation: analysis of five intraoral scanners

“…Several studies have investigated scanning accuracy under different circumstances. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 To the authors’ knowledge, only a few have used standardized models. 12 22 Dental scanning technology continues to advance rapidly with the introduction of updated and new IOS devices as well as face scanners, along with processing CAD-CAM software.…”

“…Several studies have investigated the accuracy of different IOS systems using study-specific reference models. 12 13 14 15 16 Common approaches include the use of stone casts with three to six implant lab-analogues, 17 or steel models, 11 as the reference model. Recently published trials have worked with tooth-like morphologies with various preparation designs to analyze the accuracy of digital scanners.…”

A guide for maximizing the accuracy of intraoral digital scans: Part 2—Patient factors

“…Dental arch width variation has been identified as an intraoral patient condition that can impact intraoral scanning accuracy. 8,[10][11][12] In 2020, an in vitro study measured the influence of different volumetric dimensions of maxillary casts on the scanning accuracy of three IOSs (CS 3600 from Carestream, Trios 3 from 3Shape A/S, and i500 from Medit). 10 The intermolar width tested ranged from 38.45 to 71.09 mm.…”