Comparison of measured deviations in digital implant scans depending on software and operator

Abstract

To investigate the effect of 3-dimensional (3D) analysis software and operator on the measured deviations in implant scans. A combined healing abutment-scan body (CHA-SB) system was digitized with an industrial scanner (ATOS Core 80) to generate a master standard tessellation language file (MRM-STL) and an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3) to generate 9 test-scan STL files, which were transferred into metrology-grade (Geomagic Control X, GX and GOM Inspect, GM) and nonmetrology-grade (Medit Link, ML) software for deviation analysis. Test-scan STLs were superimposed over MRM-STL and 2 planes passing through the center of the SB were generated. Distance deviations at 8 points on these planes were analyzed by two different operators with similar level of experience. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance and F tests (α=.05). Only model 1 (P=.049) analyzed by operator 2 showed significant differences among tested software, and the highest deviations were measured with GM (P≤.037). However, the difference in values measured with GX and ML was nonsignificant (P=.91). Operator correlation was high (ICC≥.712, P≤.011), except for models 1 (GM, ICC=-.335, P=.813), 2 (GM, ICC=.025, P=.468 and ML, ICC=-.013, P=.507), 6 (GM, ICC=-.085, P=.583), and 8 (GM, ICC=-.386, P=.85). The measured deviations in implant scans in all models, except for one, were similar among the tested software, regardless of the operator. The inter-rater reliability of operators while using tested 3D analysis software was overall high. When observed, low inter-rater reliability was mostly with only one of the metrology grade software. Nonmetrology-grade 3D analysis software may be a suitable alternative to metrology-grade software to measure the deviations in digital implant scan body scans. When GOM metrology-software is used, measured deviations in implant scan body scans may vary more across operators.