Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy

Abstract

PurposeTo report the means to maximize the predictability and accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans through the evaluation of operator and patient related factors.Materials and MethodsCollection of published articles related to factors that can decrease the scanning accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans was completed in 4 data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO, and Web of Science. All studies related to variables that can influence the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans obtained by using intraoral scanners (IOSs) were considered. These variables included ambient lighting, scanning pattern, implant scan body (ISB) design, techniques for splinting ISBs, arch location, implant position and inter‐implant distance.ResultsAmong operator‐related factors, ambient lighting conditions, scanning pattern, and ISB design (material, geometry, and retention design) can impact the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans. It is unclear the optimal ISB for maximizing the IOSs accuracy; however, polymer ISB can wear with multiple reuse and sterilization methods. Among patient‐related factors, additional variables should be considered, namely arch (maxillary vs mandibular arch), implant position in the arch, inter‐implant distance, implant depth, and angulation.ConclusionsAmbient lighting conditions should be established based on the IOS selected to optimize the accuracy of intraoral digital implant scans. The optimal scanning pattern may vary based on the IOS, clinical situation, and the number of implants. The optimal ISB design may vary depending on the IOS used. Metallic implant scan bodies are preferred over polymer ISB designs to minimize wear due to multiple use and sterilization distortion. Among patient‐related factors, additional variables should be considered namely the arch scanned, implant position in the arch, inter‐implant distance, implant depth and angulation. The impact of these factors may vary depending on the IOS selected.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

A guide for selecting the intraoral scan extension when fabricating tooth‐ and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses

“…It is fundamental to understand the operator‐ and patient‐related factors that can decrease the accuracy of IOSs, such as scan extension 9–11 . These influencing factors generate an accumulative scanning distortion that impacts the trueness and precision of the virtual definitive diagnostic casts captured by using IOSs 9–11 …”

“…These casts allow the fabrication of diagnostic waxing procedures, as well as the designing and manufacturing of dental prostheses, including tooth‐ and implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) 3–6 . For maximizing the accuracy and efficiency of IOSs, and therefore maximize the accuracy of the virtual casts, it is important to understand the operator‐ and patient‐related factors 9–14 that can decrease the intraoral scanning accuracy. Among operator‐related factors, scan extension is a clinician's decision that can impact the accuracy of IOSs 9,11 …”

“…For maximizing the accuracy and efficiency of IOSs, and therefore maximize the accuracy of the virtual casts, it is important to understand the operator‐ and patient‐related factors 9–14 that can decrease the intraoral scanning accuracy. Among operator‐related factors, scan extension is a clinician's decision that can impact the accuracy of IOSs 9,11 …”

“…The extension of an intraoral digital scan is defined as what portion of a dental arch is included in the scan 9,11 . While desktop scanners are not impacted by scan extension, the dental literature has reported that scanning accuracy decreases as the extension of the intraoral scan increases 15–19 .…”

“…While desktop scanners are not impacted by scan extension, the dental literature has reported that scanning accuracy decreases as the extension of the intraoral scan increases 15–19 . When acquiring virtual casts for diagnostic purposes, complete‐arch intraoral digital scans may be indicated 1,2,9,11 . However, a systematic approach for deciding scan extension when the purpose of the scan is the fabrication of tooth‐ and implant‐supported restorations is needed.…”