Gülce Çakmak1,2, Hakan Yilmaz3, Alejandro Treviño2, Ali Murat Kökat1, Burak Yilmaz4. 1. Department of Prosthodontics, Istanbul Okan University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey. 2. Division of Postdoctoral and Research, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico. 3. Department of Orthodontics, Istanbul Okan University Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul, Turkey. 4. Division of Restorative and Prosthetic Dentistry, The Ohio State University College of Dentistry, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: How the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans is affected when different intraoral scanners (IOSs) are used and the effect of scan body position on the accuracy are not well-known. PURPOSE: To compare the scan accuracy (trueness and precision) of a recently introduced IOS (Virtuo Vivo) to a commonly used IOS (TRIOS 3) and the scans of a laboratory scanner (LBS; Cares 7 SERIES) in a completely edentulous maxilla with four implants. It was also aimed to evaluate the effect of scan body position on the accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-unit scan bodies were tightened on a poly(methyl methacrylate) edentulous maxillary model with four implants. A master reference model (MRM) stereolithography (STL) file was generated by scanning the model with a high-precision scanner. The model was scanned with three different scanners (n = 10); two different IOSs and a LBS. STL files were superimposed over the MRM. RESULTS: For trueness, scan body position (P = .004) and scanner type (P < .001) had a significant effect on distance deviation and a significant interaction was found (P = .001). For angular deviation, only scanner type had a significant effect (P = .028). For precision, significant difference was found for distance (P = .011) and angular deviations (P = .020) between different scanner types. CONCLUSIONS: One scanner type was not superior to others when both trueness and precision were considered. Position of the scan body affected the distance deviation (trueness).
BACKGROUND: How the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans is affected when different intraoral scanners (IOSs) are used and the effect of scan body position on the accuracy are not well-known. PURPOSE: To compare the scan accuracy (trueness and precision) of a recently introduced IOS (Virtuo Vivo) to a commonly used IOS (TRIOS 3) and the scans of a laboratory scanner (LBS; Cares 7 SERIES) in a completely edentulous maxilla with four implants. It was also aimed to evaluate the effect of scan body position on the accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-unit scan bodies were tightened on a poly(methyl methacrylate) edentulous maxillary model with four implants. A master reference model (MRM) stereolithography (STL) file was generated by scanning the model with a high-precision scanner. The model was scanned with three different scanners (n = 10); two different IOSs and a LBS. STL files were superimposed over the MRM. RESULTS: For trueness, scan body position (P = .004) and scanner type (P < .001) had a significant effect on distance deviation and a significant interaction was found (P = .001). For angular deviation, only scanner type had a significant effect (P = .028). For precision, significant difference was found for distance (P = .011) and angular deviations (P = .020) between different scanner types. CONCLUSIONS: One scanner type was not superior to others when both trueness and precision were considered. Position of the scan body affected the distance deviation (trueness).
Authors: Adolfo Di Fiore; Lorenzo Graiff; Gianpaolo Savio; Stefano Granata; Michele Basilicata; Patrizio Bollero; Roberto Meneghello Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 4.614