Comparison of the accuracy of digital impressions and traditional impressions: Systematic review

Purpose: This study systematically examines literatures on the suitability of prostheses and accuracy of obtained impressions to see if digital impressions using intraoral scanners can replace traditional impressions. Materials and methods: A MEDLINE/PubMed search and manual search was performed for studies written in English about accuracy of digital impression published in dental journals from August 1, 1997, to July 31, 2017. Depending on criteria, the data for the selected articles were independently organized into standardized spreadsheets by 2 reviewers. Results: Among the total 35 studies met the inclusion criteria, there were 26 studies comparing the suitability of prostheses, and 9 studies comparing the accuracy of impressions through scan data without prostheses. Most studies used prostheses to compare the accuracy of impression techniques. Conclusion: This review suggests that making single crown or mesio-distally short prostheses with digital impressions is clinically reliable in natural teeth. However, there is still a limit to making mesio-distally long prostheses with digital impressions from the lack of related studies. Digital impression cannot fully replace traditional impressions in implant prostheses yet. (J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2018;56:258-68)

[1]  S. Jian,et al.  Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review. , 2015, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[2]  Evanthia Anadioti,et al.  Internal fit of pressed and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. , 2015, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[3]  G. Thomas,et al.  3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. , 2014, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[4]  M I MacEntee,et al.  Fit of three porcelain-fused-to-metal marginal designs in vivo: a scanning electron microscope study. , 1985, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[5]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Comparison of the fit of cast gold crowns fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression techniques , 2017, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[6]  Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow , 2013, BDJ.

[7]  P. Weigl,et al.  Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial , 2016, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[8]  Göran Sjögren,et al.  Accuracy of ceramic restorations made using an in-office optical scanning technique: an in vitro study. , 2014, Operative dentistry.

[9]  Sakura Shimizu,et al.  The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses. , 2017, Dental materials journal.

[10]  Daniel Edelhoff,et al.  Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization--a laboratory study. , 2014, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[11]  D. Edelhoff,et al.  Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques , 2013, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[12]  H. Kondo,et al.  Examination of the Position Accuracy of Implant Abutments Reproduced by Intra-Oral Optical Impression , 2016, PloS one.

[13]  Jae Hoon Lee,et al.  Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. , 2014, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[14]  Amirali Zandinejad,et al.  The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete-arch frameworks. , 2014, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[15]  A. Moritz,et al.  Comparison of marginal fit of cemented zirconia copings manufactured after digital impression with lava™ C.O.S and conventional impression technique , 2016, BMC Oral Health.

[16]  Henrik Skjerven,et al.  Marginal and Internal Fit of Cobalt-Chromium Fixed Dental Prostheses Generated from Digital and Conventional Impressions , 2014, International journal of dentistry.

[17]  Sibel Cetik,et al.  Adaptation of zirconia crowns created by conventional versus optical impression: in vitro study , 2017, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[18]  M. S. Jacobs,et al.  An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. , 1991, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[19]  G. de Souza,et al.  Accuracy of Digital vs Conventional Implant Impression Approach: A Three-Dimensional Comparative In Vitro Analysis. , 2017, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[20]  G. Christensen.  Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. , 2009, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[21]  S Karlsson,et al.  A clinical evaluation of fixed bridges, 10 years following insertion. , 1986, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[22]  A. Mehl,et al.  In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. , 2015, Quintessence international.

[23]  Y. Hwang,et al.  The evaluation of working casts prepared from digital impressions. , 2013, Operative dentistry.

[24]  Konstantinos Chochlidakis,et al.  Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2016, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[25]  K D Jorgensen,et al.  The relationship between the film thickness of zinc phosphate cement and the retention of veneer crowns. , 1968, Acta odontologica Scandinavica.

[26]  Jung-Bo Huh,et al.  Comparison of the accuracy of digitally fabricated polyurethane model and conventional gypsum model , 2014, The journal of advanced prosthodontics.

[27]  Guillermo Pradies,et al.  Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions , 2015, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[28]  Tariq F Alghazzawi.  Advancements in CAD/CAM technology: Options for practical implementation. , 2016, Journal of prosthodontic research.

[29]  J. Güth,et al.  Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions , 2015, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[30]  Seok-Hwan Cho,et al.  Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods. , 2015, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[31]  Jae-Hyun Kim,et al.  Fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated from conventional and digital impressions assessed with micro-CT. , 2016, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[32]  Albert Mehl,et al.  Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. , 2013, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[33]  C Ohkubo,et al.  Clinical marginal and internal gaps of Procera AllCeram crowns. , 2005, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[34]  E. D. Rekow,et al.  Factorial analysis of variables influencing stress in all-ceramic crowns. , 2006, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[35]  Tamer Abdelazim Mellik,et al.  Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. , 2015, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[36]  C. Gonzaga,et al.  Marginal and internal fit of zirconia copings obtained using different digital scanning methods. , 2016, Brazilian oral research.

[37]  Sven Rinke,et al.  Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions—a clinical comparative study , 2016, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[38]  G. Christensen.  The challenge to conventional impressions. , 2008, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[39]  C. Wyatt,et al.  A comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. , 2014, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[40]  Francisco Martínez-Rus,et al.  Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions , 2015, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[41]  S. Berrendero,et al.  Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns , 2016, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[42]  R. Carvalho,et al.  Assessment of the Internal Fit of Lithium Disilicate Crowns Using Micro-CT. , 2015, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[43]  A. Mehl,et al.  Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study. , 2011, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[44]  Sang J. Lee,et al.  Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[45]  Paul Seelbach,et al.  Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow , 2012, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[46]  B. Wöstmann,et al.  Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients , 2015, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[47]  Jian Sun,et al.  Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. , 2016, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[48]  K. Knoernschild,et al.  Periodontal tissue responses after insertion of artificial crowns and fixed partial dentures. , 2000, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[49]  Andreas Syrek,et al.  Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. , 2010, Journal of dentistry.

[50]  M Goldman,et al.  Microleakage--full crowns and the dental pulp. , 1992, Journal of endodontics.