• Users Online: 1004
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
RESEARCH
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 398-404

Do digital impressions have a greater accuracy for full-arch implant-supported reconstructions compared to conventional impressions? An in vitro study


1 Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, M.A. Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Pune, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Dr. D. Y. Patil College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Mohit Kheur
M.A. Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences and Research Centre, Pune, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_52_22

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of conventional implant impressions with digital impression techniques made using two different intraoral scanners. Setting and Design: In-Vitro study. Material and Methods: A scan of master cast containing four implants was made using two intraoral scanners: CEREC Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, USA) and 3Shape Trios (Copenhagen, Denmark) with PEEK scan bodies attached to the implants. Model was scanned ten times using different scanners. The accuracy of the chairside scanners was compared with highly accurate laboratory scanner. The scans were transferred into the software (Geomagic Control X 20, 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA) for analysis. The linear deviations and the angular deviations between the scans (scan of each model made using high-definition scanner and the master model scan) were calculated to determine the accuracy. Trueness was used as a parameter to compare the accuracy of different scanners (comparing test and reference). Statistical Analysis: Analysis of variance was performed with Bonferroni's post hoc test for multiple group comparisons. Results: Distribution of the mean overall absolute linear deviation was significantly lower in the conventional impression group compared to the CEREC Primescan scanner group and 3Shape Trios group (P < 0.05 for both). Distribution of the mean overall absolute linear deviation was significantly lower in the CEREC Primescan scanner group compared to the 3Shape Trios group (P < 0.05). Distribution of the mean overall absolute angular deviation did not differ between the three groups (P > 0.05 for all). Conclusion: Conventional impressions showed significantly greater accuracy compared to the digital impressions made with both the above intraoral scanners for implant-supported restoration of an edentulous arch. In addition, the digital impressions with the CEREC Primescan scanner showed greater accuracy as compared to the 3Shape Trios scanner.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed496    
    Printed14    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded92    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal