Effect of Scanner Type and Scan Body Location on the Accuracy of Mandibular Complete-Arch Digital Implant Scans: An In Vitro Study.

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of scans of a newly introduced intraoral scanner (IOS) (Virtuo Vivo) and a widely used IOS (Trios 3) to a laboratory scanner (LBS) (Cares 7 SERIES) for 6 implants placed in an edentulous mandible, and to investigate the effect of scan body location on trueness.Material and methodsScanbodies were tightened on 6 implants placed in an edentulous polymethylmethacrylate mandibular model. An industrial scanner was utilized to generate a master reference model STL file. Three different scanners were used to scan the model (2 IOSs and 1 LBS), and the scans (n = 10) were exported into STL files. Best‐fitting algorithm was used to superimpose test scans over the MRM‐STL (nominal). ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were performed to analyze the data (α = 0.05).ResultsThe distance deviations in Car7‐LBS scans were the highest (p < 0.001), whereas those in Tri‐IOS scans were the lowest (p < 0.001). Vir‐IOS had lower angular deviations than those of Tri‐IOS (p = 0.031). In Vir‐IOS scans, SB5 had higher distance deviations than SB2 (p = 0.029) and SB3 (p = 0.044). In Car7‐LBS scans, SB1 had higher distance deviations than SB3 (p = 0.015) and SB5 (p = 0.005). In Tri‐IOS scans, SB1 had higher mean distance deviations than SB2 and SB5 (p = 0.005). Vir‐IOS had lower precision than Car7‐LBS (distance deviation data) (p = 0.01). No difference was found among scanners for the precision of angular deviation data (p = 0.840).ConclusionWhen trueness and precision were considered, distance and angular deviations depended on the scanner type. None of the scanners outperformed others in accuracy considering all distance and angular deviations. Scan body location affected only the trueness (distance deviations).