The effect of scanner type and scan body position on the accuracy of complete‐arch digital implant scans

Abstract

BackgroundHow the accuracy of complete‐arch implant scans is affected when different intraoral scanners (IOSs) are used and the effect of scan body position on the accuracy are not well‐known.PurposeTo compare the scan accuracy (trueness and precision) of a recently introduced IOS (Virtuo Vivo) to a commonly used IOS (TRIOS 3) and the scans of a laboratory scanner (LBS; Cares 7 SERIES) in a completely edentulous maxilla with four implants. It was also aimed to evaluate the effect of scan body position on the accuracy.Materials and MethodsMulti‐unit scan bodies were tightened on a poly(methyl methacrylate) edentulous maxillary model with four implants. A master reference model (MRM) stereolithography (STL) file was generated by scanning the model with a high‐precision scanner. The model was scanned with three different scanners (n = 10); two different IOSs and a LBS. STL files were superimposed over the MRM.ResultsFor trueness, scan body position (P = .004) and scanner type (P < .001) had a significant effect on distance deviation and a significant interaction was found (P = .001). For angular deviation, only scanner type had a significant effect (P = .028). For precision, significant difference was found for distance (P = .011) and angular deviations (P = .020) between different scanner types.ConclusionsOne scanner type was not superior to others when both trueness and precision were considered. Position of the scan body affected the distance deviation (trueness).

Effect of Printing Layer Thickness on the Trueness and Margin Quality of 3D-Printed Interim Dental Crowns

“…Efficiency of 3D-printing is affected by the layer thickness, laser intensity, laser speed, build angle, the geometry of the supporting structures, and printing technology [14,21,[25][26][27]. Layer thickness is a controllable parameter that affects the accuracy, which is defined by trueness and precision [28], of the final restoration [7]. Therefore, setting the appropriate layer thickness is crucial to achieve optimum results.…”

Effect of industrial scanner and framework material interaction on the marginal gaps of CAD-CAM complete arch implant frameworks

“…The scanner and the technique used should have enabled the highest possible accuracy with optical scans. 18,19 However, the arrangement of structured light in the present study may still not be conducive to a good line of sight given the intimate contact of the framework and the multiunit abutments. Accordingly, the structured-light scanner used may have been unable to provide complete data of the scanned area, especially when reflective titanium was scanned.…”

Effect of Implant Angulation on the Rotational Displacement of a 3-Unit Bridge after Digital Impression

“…The sphere space error of the scanner was 6 μ m, and its size error was 8 μ m [ 29 ]. A thin layer (2 μ m) of antireflective powder was sprayed on the surface of the model before scanning [ 30 ]. This scan served as the reference scan for the purpose of comparison.…”