The impact of software updates on accuracy of intraoral scanners

Abstract

Background Digital workflow is showing an increasing tendency in everyday dentistry. Accuracy is essential during digital dental workflows for all indication areas. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of software updates on the accuracy of intraoral scanner (IOS) devices. Methods 3Shape Trios 3 Pod with software versions 18.1.2. (TRI3_1) and 20.1.2. (TRI3_2); 3Shape Trios 4 Move, version 19.2.2. (TRI4_1); and 3Shape Trios 4 Pod, version 20.1.1. (TRI4_2) were used to take direct optical impressions from a polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) full arch reference model with prepared teeth (FDI 11,14,17 for crowns and FDI 26 for onlay) and an edentulous region (between FDI 14 and 17). The scanners were used eight times; STL files were imported into Geomagic Control X for accuracy assessment by comparing them to a reference data set created by an industrial high-precision scanner (AICON SmartScan-3D C5). The average deviation of the surface points was calculated in three locations: across a full arch (Parameter 1), the region of a four-unit bridge (Parameter 2), and a single prepared abutment (Parameter 3). Results In parameter 1 and 2, the newest model with the latest software (TRI4_2) reached the highest accuracy (31.06 ± 5.24 µm and 21.69 ± 7.50 µm). In parameter 3, an older generation scanner running legacy software produced the highest accuracy: TRI4_1, 11.75 ± 0.35 µm. Conclusion Appropriate software updates can significantly increase the trueness and precision of intraoral scanner devices. With updated software, the older generation can match the accuracy level of latest equipment.

Comparison of the Accuracy and Precision in Digital Scans for Implant-Supported Maxillary Hybrid Prosthesis: In Vitro Study

“…These variations in rankings may be attributed to differences in the chin model, materials, or implant brands evaluated in the studies. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that software version differences in IOS, similar to model differences, can affect the accuracy and precision of digital scans [54,55].…”

Feasibility of images acquired using smartphone camera for marginal and internal fit of fixed dental prosthesis: comparison and correlation study

“…Son et al 45 demonstrated a difference in the accuracy of the dental scanner used depending on the software program using 3D analysis. Schmalzl et al 46 reported that the accuracy of intraoral scanners was affected by software updates. Furthermore, Fortin et al 47 mentioned that differences in the software used could cause variations in the measurement results; they also compared the reliability difference between ImageJ and OsiriX.…”

Comparison of Tooth Size Measurements in Orthodontics Using Conventional and 3D Digital Study Models

“…This suggests that the type of scanning technique used can significantly impact the repeatability and consistency of measurements. The superior repeatability of the plaster models could be attributed to the direct physical replication of the oral structures, minimizing potential errors associated with data processing and algorithmic calculations inherent in digital models [20,21]. During the intraoral scanning process, errors can be caused by factors such as surrounding soft tissue, the presence of saliva and bleeding, patients' movements, the size of the scanner head, limited mouth opening, and the experience of the operator [22].…”