Digital Intraoral Scanners and Alginate Impressions in Reproducing Full Dental Arches: A Comparative 3D Assessment

Kyungmin Clara Lee,Seong-Joon Park

doi:10.3390/app10217637

Abstract

The purpose of this in vivo study was to compare in vivo full arch intraoral scans obtained using two intraoral scanners and conventional impression. Twenty patients were scanned using TRIOS and iTero scanners, as well as conventional impression. Dental models obtained from alginate impression were scanned with a laboratory desktop scanner. Individual intraoral scan data were compared with corresponding model scans using three-dimensional (3D) surface analysis. The average surface deviations were calculated for quantitative evaluation, and these values were compared between two intraoral scanners using the paired t-test. In the 3D surface analysis, most deviations between intraoral scans and model scans presented on the posterior teeth. The average surface deviations were less than 0.10 ± 0.03 mm. The results of 3D surface analysis indicated that there was 0.10 mm of overall deviation between conventional alginate impressions and in vivo full dental arch intraoral scans. Clinicians should take this into consideration when performing intraoral scanning for full dental arches.

Highlights

Conventional alginate impression techniques have been challenging for patients with sensitive gag reflexes, causing feelings of irritation and discomfort [1]
0.10 mm of overall deviation between conventional alginate impressions and in vivo full dental arch intraoral scans. Clinicians should take this into consideration when performing intraoral scanning for full dental arches
Since the plaster model and intraoral scans are used together in clinics, it is necessary to evaluate the difference between alginate impression and intraoral scanners

Summary

Introduction

Conventional alginate impression techniques have been challenging for patients with sensitive gag reflexes, causing feelings of irritation and discomfort [1]. Dr Francois Duret introduced CAD/CAM concepts into dentistry in. 1989 [3,4,5], and several intraoral scanners have been introduced recently [6,7]. Since the plaster model and intraoral scans are used together in clinics, it is necessary to evaluate the difference between alginate impression and intraoral scanners. Alginate impression is still being used to fabricate orthodontic diagnostic models or orthodontic appliances. The two intraoral scanners were used, TRIOS and iTero. The scanning technology of the two scanners is confocal microscopy; the light sources of the two scanners are different. TRIOS is based on a structured-light scanner with an infrared light inside, whereas iTero uses laser as its light source

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion