Accuracy of intraoral scanning in completely and partially edentulous maxillary and mandibular jaws: an in vitro analysis

New generation intraoral scanners are promoted to be suitable for digital scans of long-span edentulous spaces and completely edentulous arches; however, the evidence is lacking. The current study evaluated the accuracy of intraoral scanning (IOS) in partially and completely edentulous arch models and analyzed the influence of operator experience on accuracy. Four different resin models (completely and partially edentulous maxilla and mandible) were scanned, using a new generation IOS device (n = 20 each). Ten scans of each model were performed by an IOS-experienced and an inexperienced operator. An industrial high-precision scanner was employed to obtain reference scans. IOS files of each model-operator combination, their respective reference scan files (n = 10 each; total = 80), as well as the IOS files from each model generated by the same operator, were superimposed (n = 45; total = 360) to calculate trueness and precision. An ANOVA for mixed models and post hoc t tests for mixed models were used to assess group-wise differences (α = 0.05). The median overall trueness and precision were 24.2 μm (IQR 20.7–27.4 μm) and 18.3 μm (IQR 14.4–22.1 μm), respectively. The scans of the inexperienced operator had significantly higher trueness in the edentulous mandibular model (p = 0.0001) and higher precision in the edentulous maxillary model (p = 0.0004). The accuracy of IOS for partially and completely edentulous arches in in vitro settings was high. Experience with IOS had small influence on the accuracy of the scans. IOS with the tested new generation intraoral scanner may be suitable for the fabrication of removable dentures regardless of clinician’s experience in IOS.

[1]  D Rekow,et al.  Computer-aided design and manufacturing in dentistry: a review of the state of the art. , 1987, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[2]  Kishan Singh,et al.  Effect of different impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of impressions using various elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study. , 2012, The journal of contemporary dental practice.

[3]  Wael Att,et al.  Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws. , 2013, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[4]  Mathew T Kattadiyil,et al.  Intraoral scanning of hard and soft tissues for partial removable dental prosthesis fabrication. , 2014, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[5]  I. Naert,et al.  Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. , 2016, Clinical oral implants research.

[6]  T. Goto,et al.  Digital assessment of preliminary impression accuracy for edentulous jaws: Comparisons of 3-dimensional surfaces between study and working casts. , 2016, Journal of prosthodontic research.

[7]  S. Heo,et al.  Comparison of experience curves between two 3-dimensional intraoral scanners. , 2016, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

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

[9]  Daniel Edelhoff,et al.  Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization , 2016, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[10]  Mathew T Kattadiyil,et al.  Comparison of denture base adaptation between CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques. , 2016, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[11]  J. Katsoulis,et al.  Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. , 2016, Quintessence international.

[12]  S. Hancocks What is digital about dentistry? , 2017, BDJ.

[13]  Mantas Vaitiekūnas,et al.  Accuracy of digital implant impressions with intraoral scanners. A systematic review. , 2017, European journal of oral implantology.

[14]  Albert Mehl,et al.  Precision of guided scanning procedures for full-arch digital impressions in vivo , 2017, Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie.

[15]  S. Logozzo,et al.  Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature , 2017, BMC oral health.

[16]  T. Joda,et al.  Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial , 2017, Clinical oral implants research.

[17]  Tabea V Flügge,et al.  Group 5 ITI Consensus Report: Digital technologies. , 2018, Clinical oral implants research.

[18]  Kyung-Min Lee,et al.  Reproducibility of an intraoral scanner: A comparison between in‐vivo and ex‐vivo scans , 2018, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[19]  Brian J Goodacre,et al.  Using Intraoral Scanning to Fabricate Complete Dentures: First Experiences. , 2018, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[20]  M. Finkelman,et al.  Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy , 2017, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[21]  F. Mangano,et al.  Conventional Vs Digital Impressions: Acceptability, Treatment Comfort and Stress Among Young Orthodontic Patients , 2018, The open dentistry journal.

[22]  Lucio Lo Russo,et al.  Removable complete digital dentures: A workflow that integrates open technologies. , 2017, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[23]  Tabea V Flügge,et al.  The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant‐supported dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2018, Clinical oral implants research.

[24]  P. Steinmassl,et al.  CAD/CAM produces dentures with improved fit , 2018, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[25]  P. Vallittu,et al.  Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review , 2018, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[26]  Xueyin An,et al.  Digital intraoral scanning technique for edentulous jaws. , 2017, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[27]  Jan-Frederik Güth,et al.  Accuracy of full-arch digital impressions: an in vitro and in vivo comparison , 2019, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[28]  T. Perneger,et al.  Edentulous jaw impression techniques: An in vivo comparison of trueness , 2019, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[29]  Frauke Müller,et al.  CAD-CAM milled dentures: The Geneva protocols for digital dentures. , 2019, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[30]  R. Jung,et al.  Time efficiency and quality of outcomes in a model-free digital workflow using digital impression immediately after implant placement: A double-blind self-controlled clinical trial. , 2019, Clinical oral implants research.

[31]  A. Mehl,et al.  Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. , 2019, International journal of computerized dentistry.

[32]  Mutlu Özcan,et al.  A digital cast-free clinical workflow for oral rehabilitation with removable partial dentures: A dental technique. , 2020, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[33]  D. Bartlett,et al.  Investigation into the accuracy and measurement methods of sequential 3D dental scan alignment. , 2019, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[34]  D. Gross,et al.  Digitalization in dentistry: ethical challenges and implications. , 2019, Quintessence international.

[35]  M. Ferrari,et al.  Full arch precision of six intraoral scanners in vitro. , 2019, Journal of prosthodontic research.

[36]  J. Seidt,et al.  Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses. , 2019, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.