In vitro comparative analysis of scanning accuracy of intraoral and laboratory scanners in measuring the distance between multiple implants

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral scanners by comparing the trueness and precision of several types of scanners in measuring the distance between the ball abutments on pairs of multiple implants.MethodsSeven implants were placed on a fully edentulous upper jaw model. After ball abutments were attached to the implants on the master model, the three-dimensional (3D) shape of the model was evaluated using a computer numerical control 3D coordinate-measuring machine. Subsequently, the 3D shape-related data of the model were obtained using two types of intraoral scanners (3M True Definition Scanner [TDS] and 3Shape Trios3 [TR3]) and two types of laboratory scanners (KaVo ARCTICA Auto Scan [KA] and Identica Hybrid [IH]). Using the obtained 3D shape-related data, the trueness and precision in measuring the distance between the balls within seven pairs of ball abutments were compared among the scanners using 3D analysis software.ResultsIntraoral scanners produced significantly greater errors in trueness and precision than laboratory scanners in measuring the distances between the ball abutments in all the dental regions. Between the intraoral scanners, powder-requiring TDS produced significantly lower errors at inflection points than powder-free TR3.ConclusionsThese results indicate that an optical impression technique using an intraoral scanner is suitable for dental implant treatment in patients with a few missing teeth.