Comparing the accuracy of full-arch implant impressions using the conventional technique and digital scans with and without prefabricated landmarks in the mandible: An in vitro study

Yan, Kun; Zhang, Yaopeng; Wang, Yong; Chen, Hu; Sun, Yuchun

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104561

Cited by 22 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some authors have reported that these techniques used to provide more landmarks could improve the scanning trueness. 23 , 24 , 25 However, Azevedo et al 26 analysed the trueness of the ISB splinted technique and artificial landmark technique. They found these techniques had no impact on the trueness of digital implant scans of the edentulous arch.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a Novel ‘Scan Body’ on the In Vitro Scanning Accuracy of Full-Arch Implant Impressions

Zhang,

Yang,

et al. 2024

International Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a Novel ‘Scan Body’ on the In Vitro Scanning Accuracy of Full-Arch Implant Impressions

Zhang,

Yang,

et al. 2024

International Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This also explains the significantly better accuracy in the SSLS and PG groups than in the IOS group. Iturrate, Minguez, et al, 2019;Ke et al, 2023;Kernen et al, 2022;Mandelli et al, 2020;Mizumoto et al, 2020;Venezia et al, 2019); and (3) custom scan bodies (Huang et al, 2020). When considering full-arch digital implant impression, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) could effectively improve the accuracy of long-span inter-implant distances compared to an intraoral scanner, whereas the latter can acquire high-quality details that appear to be more suitable for short spans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of digital implant impressions using a novel structured light scanning system assisted by a planar mirror in the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study

Ke,

Zhang,

Tian

et al. 2023

Clinical Oral Implants Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis study aimed to develop a structured light scanning system with a planar mirror to enhance the digital full‐arch implant impression accuracy and to compare it with photogrammetry and intraoral scanner methods.Materials and MethodsAn edentulous maxillary stone cast with six scan bodies was scanned as the reference model using a laboratory scanner. Three scanning modalities were compared (n = 10): (1) self‐developed structured light scanning with a mirror (SSLS); (2) intraoral scanner (IOS); and (3) photogrammetry system (PG). The scanners were stopped for 1 min after each scan. Six scan bodies were analysed within each scan model. Linear deviations between the scan bodies (1–2, 1–3, 1–4, 1–5, and 1–6) and 3D mucosal deviations were established. The overall deviation was calculated as the mean of all linear deviations. “Trueness” represented the discrepancy between the test and reference files, while “precision” denoted the consistency among the test files. Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests were used for statistical analyses.ResultsSignificant overall linear discrepancies were noted among the SSLS, PG, and IOS groups (p < .001). SSLS showed the best overall trueness and precision (6.6, 5.7 μm), followed by PG (58.4, 6.8 μm) and IOS (214.6, 329.1 μm). For the 3D mucosal deviation, the trueness (p < .001) and precision (p < .001) of the SSLS group were significantly better than those of the IOS group.ConclusionsThe SSLS exhibited higher accuracy in determining the implant positions than the PG and IOS. Additionally, it demonstrated better accuracy in capturing the mucosa than IOS.

show abstract

“…Lastly, the review did not explicitly account for the impact of landmark use on the trueness and precision of impressions. While Ke et al [18] found that landmarks improved these factors, more extensive exploration of this aspect across the different studies would have strengthened the review.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparative Analysis of Intraoral Scanners and Traditional Impression Methods in Full-Arch Implantology: A Systematic Review

Alhelwani,

Blom,

Leusink

et al. 2024

MRAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The comparative effectiveness of intraoral scanners (IOS) and conventional impression (CI) methods in full-arch implantology has been a topic of ongoing debate. This systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive comparison of these methods across different applications and conditions. Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, with the search conducted across different online databases and the relevant studies were extracted, following which they underwent bias assessment and their relevance towards this review was examined. Results: Five in-vitro studies, encompassing various types of IOS and CI methods, were systematically reviewed. The review revealed that neither IOS nor CI could be deemed universally superior. Their relative effectiveness varied depending on several factors, including the specific application, the presence or absence of landmarks, and the type of dimensional analysis used. For instance, while digital techniques offered advantages in terms of minimal distortion for tilted implants, conventional methods demonstrated superior trueness in other scenarios. Conclusion: The findings underscored the importance of a context-specific approach in selecting between IOS and CI, thereby guiding clinical practice and informing future research. However, the transferability of the findings to clinical practice may be limited due to the in-vitro study design, the variety of IOS types, the unaccounted influence of operator skill, and the incomplete exploration of the role of landmarks. Future studies should address these limitations to further enhance our understanding of full-arch implantology.

show abstract

Comparing the accuracy of full-arch implant impressions using the conventional technique and digital scans with and without prefabricated landmarks in the mandible: An in vitro study

Cited by 22 publications

References 36 publications

Effect of a Novel ‘Scan Body’ on the In Vitro Scanning Accuracy of Full-Arch Implant Impressions

Effect of a Novel ‘Scan Body’ on the In Vitro Scanning Accuracy of Full-Arch Implant Impressions

Accuracy of digital implant impressions using a novel structured light scanning system assisted by a planar mirror in the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study

Comparative Analysis of Intraoral Scanners and Traditional Impression Methods in Full-Arch Implantology: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About