Effect of intraoral scanner and fixed partial denture situation on the scan accuracy of multiple implants: An in vitro study

Abstract

Background: Accuracy of intraoral implant scans may be affected by the region of the implant and the type of the intraoral scanner (IOSs). However, there is limited knowledge on the scan accuracy of multiple implants placed for an implant-supported fixed partial denture (FPD) in different partially edentulous situations when digitized by using different IOSs.Purpose: To investigate the effect of IOS and FPD situation on the scan accuracy of two implants when partial-arch scans were performed. Materials and Methods: Tissue level implants were placed in 3 maxillary models with implant spaces either at right first premolar and right first molar sites (Model 1, 3-unit FPD), at right canine and right first molar sites (Model 2, 4-unit FPD), or at lateral incisor sites (Model 3, 4-unit FPD). Reference standard tessellation language (STL) files of the models were generated by using an optical scanner (ATOS Capsule 200MV120). Two IOSs (CEREC Primescan [CP] and TRIOS 3 [TR]) were used to perform partial-arch scans (test-scans) of each model (n = 14), which were exported in STL format. A metrology-grade analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018) was used to superimpose test-scan STLs over the reference STL to calculate 3D distance, interimplant distance, and angular (mesiodistal and buccopalatal) deviations. Trueness and precision analyses were performed by using bootstrap analysis of variance followed by Welch tests with Holm correction (α = 0.05).Results: Trueness of the scans was affected by IOS and FPD situation when 3D distance deviations were considered, while inter-implant distance, mesiodistal angular, and buccopalatal angular deviations were only affected by the FPD situation (p < 0.001). Scan precision was affected by the interaction between the IOSs and the FPD situation when 3D distance and buccopalatal angular deviations were

Intraoral Scan Accuracy and Time Efficiency in Implant-Supported Fixed Partial Dentures: A Systematic Review

“…In several other included studies, CIT was observed to be more accurate for partially edentulous jaws. The extent and region (anterior/posterior) of the edentulous area are considered pivotal criteria, indicating that a greater span length compromised the scan accuracy [ 29 ]. Other factors that can influence scanning outcomes include light reflection, operator motion, and restricted intraoral space.…”

Verification of the accuracy of dynamic navigation for conventional and mouthpiece methods: in vivo study

“…The application of digital technology in dentistry is rapidly advancing. Intraoral scanners (IOS) and computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/ CAM) have reduced the treatment time and improved the accuracy of prosthetics [1][2][3]. Recently, the concepts of top-down treatment and static and dynamic navigation are widely employed to improve the accuracy of implant placement [4,5].…”