Accuracy and dimension stability of scannable versus conventional interocclusal registration materials: An in vitro study

Abstract

Statement of problemScientific data to support scannable and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM)-compatible interocclusal registration materials are lacking. PurposeThe purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the ability of different registration materials (conventional versus scannable) to record maxillary-mandibular relationships and compare the dimensional stability of these records after storage times of 1 hour and 48 hours. Material and methodsSix groups of interocclusal registration materials were tested: 3 conventional (Registrado X-tra, Futar D Fast, and O-Bite) and 3 scannable (Registrado Scan, Futar Cut & Trim Fast, and O-Bite Scan). Eight registrations were made for each group by using a custom-made device with a dial gauge to measure vertical discrepancies. Records were stored at room temperature, and discrepancies measured after 1 hour and 48 hours. The data were statistically analyzed with the Wilcoxon test with respect to time and the Kruskal-Wallis test with respect to materials, followed by the Mann-Whitney test with the Bonferroni-Holm correction (α=.05). ResultsThe median vertical discrepancies ranged from -2 μm (FS) to 11 μm (O-Bite) after 1 hour and from 3 μm (Futar Cut & Trim Fast) to 13 μm (Registrado X-tra and O-Bite) after 48 hours. A statistically significant difference (P<.001) was found between the results after 1 hour and 48 hours for all materials. All scannable interocclusal registration materials showed significantly lower vertical discrepancies than the corresponding conventional materials after 1 hour and 48 hours (P<.05). ConclusionsAll registration materials showed vertical discrepancies that might be clinically acceptable. Vertical discrepancies increased after 48 hours of storage for all materials but were still clinically acceptable.