J Adv Prosthodont.  2022 Dec;14(6):388-398. 10.4047/jap.2022.14.6.388.

Accuracy of 14 intraoral scanners for the All-on-4 treatment concept: a comparative in vitro study

• Kaya G
• Bilmenoglu C

• KMID: 2537085
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2022.14.6.388

Abstract

PURPOSE
. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of 14 different intraoral scanners for the All-on-4 treatment concept.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
. Four implants were placed in regions 13, 16, 23, and 26 of an edentulous maxillary model that was poured with scannable Type 4 gypsum to imitate the All-on-4 concept. The cast was scanned 10 times for each of 14 intraoral scanners (Primescan, iTero 2, iTero 5D, Virtuo Vivo, Trios 3, Trios 4, CS3600, CS3700, Emerald, Emerald S, Medit i500, BenQ BIS-I, Heron IOS, and Aadva IOS 100P) after the polyether ether ketone scanbody was placed. For the control group, the gypsum model was scanned 10 times with an industrial scanner. The first of the 10 virtual models obtained from the industrial model was chosen as the reference model. For trueness, the data of the 14 dental scanners were superimposed with the reference model; for precision, the data of all 14 scanners were superimposed within the groups. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Shapiro-Wilks, and Dunn’s tests.
RESULTS
. Primescan showed the highest trueness and precision values (P < .005), followed by the iTero 5D scanner (P < .005).
CONCLUSION
. Some of these digital scanners can be used to make impressions within the All-on-4 concept. However, the possibility of data loss due to artifacts, reflections, and the inability to combine the data should be considered.

Keyword

Intraoral scanner; Trueness; Precision; Accuracy; Digital impression