Influence of the surface humidity, implant angulation, and interimplant distance on the accuracy and scanning time of complete-arch implant scans

Gómez‐Polo, Miguel; Ortega, Rocío; Sallorenzo, Alessandro; Agustín-Panadero, Rubén; Barmak, Abdul Basir; Kois, John C.; Revilla‐León, Marta

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104307

Cited by 24 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…36 However, the effect of some of these variables differ when obtaining intraoral digital implant scans namely ambient lighting conditions, 37 scanning pattern, [38][39][40] and interdental space (adjacent tooth and implant scan body). Furthermore, additional factors should be considered when recording intraoral implant digital scans such as implant depth and angulation, [41][42][43][44][45] inter-implant distance, 27,46,47 and implant scan body design (material, geometry, and retention system). [48][49][50][51][52][53][54] The factors that can decrease intraoral scanning accuracy generate an accumulated scanning distortion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy

Revilla‐León,

Lanis,

Yilmaz

et al. 2023

Journal of Prosthodontics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo report the means to maximize the predictability and accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans through the evaluation of operator and patient related factors.Materials and MethodsCollection of published articles related to factors that can decrease the scanning accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans was completed in 4 data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO, and Web of Science. All studies related to variables that can influence the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans obtained by using intraoral scanners (IOSs) were considered. These variables included ambient lighting, scanning pattern, implant scan body (ISB) design, techniques for splinting ISBs, arch location, implant position and inter‐implant distance.ResultsAmong operator‐related factors, ambient lighting conditions, scanning pattern, and ISB design (material, geometry, and retention design) can impact the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans. It is unclear the optimal ISB for maximizing the IOSs accuracy; however, polymer ISB can wear with multiple reuse and sterilization methods. Among patient‐related factors, additional variables should be considered, namely arch (maxillary vs mandibular arch), implant position in the arch, inter‐implant distance, implant depth, and angulation.ConclusionsAmbient lighting conditions should be established based on the IOS selected to optimize the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans. The optimal scanning pattern may vary based on the IOS, clinical situation, and the number of implants. The optimal ISB design may vary depending on the IOS used. Metallic implant scan bodies are preferred over polymer ISB designs to minimize wear due to multiple use and sterilization distortion. Among patient‐related factors, additional variables should be considered namely the arch scanned, implant position in the arch, inter‐implant distance, implant depth and angulation. The impact of these factors may vary depending on the IOS selected.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy

Revilla‐León,

Lanis,

Yilmaz

et al. 2023

Journal of Prosthodontics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…43 This is can be possibly attributed to the stitching process concept, because the inter-implant space is limited and, therefore, stitching is easier. 11,24 The inclination of dental implants is a crucial parameter affecting implant impression accuracy both for conventional 7 and for digital techniques. For digital impression methods however, there is still controversy about the influence of implant angulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of intraoral scan bodies and their influence on impression accuracy: A systematic review

Pachiou,

Zervou,

Tsirogiannis

et al. 2023

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the influence of the characteristics of intraoral scan bodies (ISBs) on the accuracy of intraoral scanning.Materials and MethodsAn electronic search was conducted through PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus and Cochrane Library, up to March 2023. The literature search intended to retrieve all relevant clinical and in vitro studies about the effect that the various properties of ISBs may have on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scanning. Only publications in English language were selected with animal studies, case reports, case series, technique presentation articles and expert opinions being excluded.ResultsA total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. They were published between 2019 and 2023 and were all in vitro studies. Among the parameters described, the scan body material, position, geometry, height, diameter, and fixation torque were evaluated. The most common materials used for ISBs were polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium alloys. The diameter and position of ISBs seemed to affect the trueness of implant impressions. Subgingival implant position and decreased ISB height affected negatively the trueness of scanning. Geometrical characteristics of ISBs also affect the implant impression accuracy, especially the bevel location and the types of designing modifications.ConclusionsThe characteristics of the currently used ISBs vary widely and the available scientific evidence is not yet conclusive about the optimal design of ISB. The implant impression accuracy achieved by any of the studied parameters is encouraging. Clinical studies are however necessary for more concrete conclusions.Clinical SignificanceISBs play a vital role in the digital workflow and influence significantly the accuracy and fit of implant restorations. More clinical trials are needed in order to conclude to the optimal characteristics of ISBs which would further enhance the success of the restorations.

show abstract

“…After completing the conventional impression steps, the EVA parts around the ISSs in the reference models were trimmed to control the influence of the transparent plastic sheets on the scanning [29] (Fig. 3d).…”

Section: Intraoral Scanning Workflowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…impression technique [28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. However, little is known about how intraoral conditions can influence the accuracy of DITs and CITs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of intraoral conditions on the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impression techniques for two-implant-supported fixed dental prostheses

Guo

Jiang

et al. 2023

J Prosthodont Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Misfitting implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) may lead to an increased rate of biological and mechanical complications and further influence the long-term success of implants [1,2]. As the first step in fabricating a passively fitting implant-supported FDP, accurate implant impressions obtained using either conventional (CITs) or digital impression techniques (DITs) are crucial [2][3][4].CITs are a reliable and standard approach for transferring the positions of dental implants [5]. However, certain limitations exist, including high complexity, time consumption, material costs, storage issues, and unpleasant patient experiences [6,7]. Over the past several decades, DITs using intraoral scanners have been considered an advantageous alternative to CITs because they improve comfort and are more efficient [8,9]. However, the accuracy of DITs remains inconclusive, and a wide range of values (5.38-810 µm) is documented [10].Most recent studies regarding the accuracy of implant impression techniques are limited to laboratory study designs [11][12][13][14][15][16][17], and only a few clinical studies have been reported [18]. As defined by ISO 5725-1, accuracy comprises trueness and precision. Trueness describes the deviation of the obtained results from true reference values. However, a standard method for intraoral acquisition of the actual reference positions of implants has not yet been developed [3]. Precision describes the closeness of agreement between the results of repeated measurements on the same object. Although the precision of impression techniques can be evaluated in clinical studies by measuring the difference between repeated intraoral impressions [19][20][21], previous precision studies regarding implant impression techniques mainly employed in vitro designs [22][23][24][25][26], and clinical data remain very limited [27]. Compared with extraoral conditions, intraoral conditions involve more complex factors associated with the impression removal pathway, including temperature, humidity, saliva, tongue movements, limited spaces, and different ambient light conditions, which may influence the accuracy of the J Prosthodont Res. 2023; **(**):

show abstract

Influence of the surface humidity, implant angulation, and interimplant distance on the accuracy and scanning time of complete-arch implant scans

Cited by 24 publications

References 36 publications

Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy

Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy

Characteristics of intraoral scan bodies and their influence on impression accuracy: A systematic review

Influence of intraoral conditions on the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impression techniques for two-implant-supported fixed dental prostheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About