Is There a Significant Difference in Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners for Short-Span Fixed Dental Prosthesis? A Comparative In Vitro Study

Adrian Bara,Anca Jivănescu,Andrei-Bogdan Faur,Raul Nicolae Rotar

doi:10.3390/app11188280

Adrian Bara, Anca Jivănescu + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/app11188280

Copy DOI

Abstract

Is the accuracy of the older generation of IOSs an impediment for obtaining a quality intraoral digital impression? The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in accuracy between four intraoral scanners (two of the latest IOSs and two older IOSs) in the scenario of a short span fixed partial denture, and to determine if these differences have a major impact on the quality of the final digital impression. Four intraoral scanners: Cerec PrimeScan, Medit i700, Cerec Omnicam and Planmeca PlanScan and one laboratory scanner were used in this study. The scanned data were processed with the help of Geomagic Control X, a metrology software. For the statistical data analysis, the level of significance was set as 0.05 (α = 0.05). The Medit i700 group displayed the best level of trueness with the median value of 23.25 µm, PrimeScan group with a median of 25.55 µm, Omnicam group with a median of 32.3 µm and the PlanScan group which displayed the lowest level of trueness with a median value of 75.8 µm. From the precision data analysis, it was concluded that the PrimeScan group showed the best results, followed by Medit i700, Omnicam and the PlanScan group which showed the lowest precision. Even if there are some significant differences in accuracy between old and new IOSs, in the in vitro scenario of short span dental prostheses, the accuracy values were within the clinically acceptable range and may present important clinical implications.

Highlights

Today, acquiring an intraoral scanner (IOS) for the dental office can be a major step forward for both the quality of the treatments and the overall impression for the patient serving as an ideal marketing tool [1]
The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in accuracy between four intraoral scanners in the scenario of a short span fixed partial denture and to determine
We considered IOSs released more than five years ago as being part of the old generation of IOSs

Summary

Introduction

Today, acquiring an intraoral scanner (IOS) for the dental office can be a major step forward for both the quality of the treatments and the overall impression for the patient serving as an ideal marketing tool [1]. The latest IOSs can be a big investment for the dental office and not all dentists may be able to afford it. The following question arises: are the IOSs released in the previous years a good and reliable alternative to the latest scanners emerging on the market?. The clinical applications of intraoral scanners (IOSs) have increased significantly providing dentists with relevant information that enhance the entire treatment plan and procedure. One of the main advantages of IOSs is the possibility to completely replace the conventional impression, reducing the discomfort for the patient, the working procedure and the overall costs of the impression materials. The immediate evaluation of the quality of the digital impression is another beneficial aspect that enhances the impression procedure [6,7,8,9]

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion