Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update

The aim of this clinical study was to update the available data in the literature regarding the transfer accuracy (trueness/precision) of four current intraoral scanners (IOS) equipped with the latest software versions and to compare these data with conventional impressions (CVI). A metallic reference aid served as a reference dataset. Four digital impressions (Trios3Cart, Trios3Pod, Trios4Pod, and Primescan) and one CVI were investigated in five patients. Scan data were analyzed using three-dimensional analysis software and conventional models using a coordinate measurement machine. The transfer accuracy between the reference aid and the impression methods were compared. Differences with p < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Overall, mean ± standard deviation (SD) transfer accuracy ranged from 24.6 ± 17.7 µm (CVI) to 204.5 ± 182.1 µm (Trios3Pod). The Primescan yielded the lowest deviation for digital impressions (33.8 ± 31.5 µm), followed by Trios4Pod (65.2 ± 52.9 µm), Trios3Cart (84.7 ± 120.3 µm), and Trios3Pod. Within the limitations of this study, current IOS equipped with the latest software versions demonstrated less deviation for short-span distances compared with the conventional impression technique. However, for long-span distances, the conventional impression technique provided the lowest deviation. Overall, currently available IOS systems demonstrated improvement regarding transfer accuracy of full-arch scans in patients

Elastic deformation of the mandibular jaw revisited—a clinical comparison between digital and conventional impressions using a reference

Objectives!#!Due to the partly strongly differing results in the literature, the aim of the present study was to investigate a possible deformation of the mandible during mouth opening using an intraoral scanner (IOS) and a conventional impression for comparison with a reference aid.!##!Materials and methods!#!Four steel spheres were reversibly luted in the mandibular (n = 50) with a metallic reference aid at maximum mouth opening (MMO). Two digital impressions (Trios3), at MMO and at slightly mouth opening SMO and a conventional impression (Impregum), were taken as the measuring accuracy of the reference structure was already known. Difference between MMO-SMO for digital impressions and deviations between digital and conventional (SMO) were calculated. Furthermore, the angle between the normal vectors of two constructed planes was measured. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS25.!##!Results!#!Deviations for linear distances ranged from -1 ± 3 μm up to 17 ± 78 μm (digital impressions, MMO-SMO), from 19 ± 16 μm up to 132 ± 90 μm (digital impressions, SMO), and from 28 ± 17 μm up to 60 ± 52 μm (conventional impressions, SMO). There were no significant differences for digital impressions (MMO-SMO), and there were significant differences between the conventional and digital impressions at SMO.!##!Conclusions!#!Based on the results of the present study, no mandibular deformation could be detected during mouth opening with regard to the digital impressions. The results were rather within the measuring tolerance of the intraoral scanner.!##!Clinical relevance!#!Based on the present study, no deformation of the mandibular during mouth opening could be observed at the level previously assumed. Therewith related, dental techniques related to a possible mandibular deformation therefore should be reconsidered