Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of dental three-dimensional (3D) scanners according to the types of teeth. A computer-aided design (CAD) reference model (CRM) was obtained by scanning the reference typodont model using a high-precision industrial scanner (Solutionix C500, MEDIT). In addition, a CAD test model (CTM) was obtained using seven types of dental 3D scanners (desktop scanners (E1 and DOF Freedom HD) and intraoral scanners (CS3500, CS3600, Trios2, Trios3, and i500)). The 3D inspection software (Geomagic control X, 3DSystems) was used to segment the CRM according to the types of teeth and to superimpose the CTM based on the segmented teeth. The 3D accuracy of the scanner was then analyzed according to the types of teeth. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the differences according to the types of teeth in statistical analysis, and the Tukey HSD test was used for post hoc testing (α = 0.05). Both desktop and intraoral scanners showed significant differences in accuracy according to the types of teeth (P < 0.001), and the accuracy of intraoral scanners tended to get worse from anterior to posterior. Therefore, when scanning a complete arch using an intraoral scanner, the clinician should consider the tendency for the accuracy to decrease from anterior to posterior.
Highlights
The introduction of dental computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) has enabled the use of a digital workflow instead of a conventional workflow that relies on operator experience and skills [1,2,3,4,5]
When scanning a complete arch using an intraoral scanner, the clinician should consider the tendency for the accuracy to decrease from anterior to posterior
Both desktop and intraoral scanners had significant differences in accuracy according to the types of teeth (P < 0.001) (Table 2 and Figure 5)
Summary
The introduction of dental computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) has enabled the use of a digital workflow instead of a conventional workflow that relies on operator experience and skills [1,2,3,4,5]. The introduction of intraoral scanners in the 1980s has enabled a fully digital workflow [1,2,3,10]. This has reduced the effects of the operator’s experience and possible errors in the material (impression and dental stone) [3,7,8,11,12]. Digital workflow is being verified as a reliable alternative in clinical practice through clinical trials [16,17,18]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
