The effect of the improperly scanned scan body images on the accuracy of virtual implant positioning in computer-aided design software

Abstract

PURPOSE.The aim of this study was to examine the importance of the defect-free scanning of a scan body by assessing the accuracy of virtual implant positioning in computer-aided design (CAD) software when the scan body image is improperly scanned. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A scan body was digitized in a dentiform model using an intraoral scanner, and scanned images with differing levels of image deficiency were generated: 5%, 10%, and 15% deficiency in the flat or rounded area. Using a best-fit image matching algorithm on each of the deficient scan body images, corresponding virtual implants were created. The accuracy of the implant position was evaluated by comparing the linear and angular discrepancies between the actual and virtual positions of the implant. Kruskal-Wallis tests and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were used to determine the statistical differences among the seven scanned image deficiency groups (α=.05). RESULTS. In general, the linear and angular discrepancies of the implant position in the software increased as the deficiency of the scan body images increased. A 15% scan body image deficiency generated larger discrepancies than deficiency of 5% and 10%. The difference of scan defect position, flat or rounded area, did not affect the accuracy of virtual implant orientation at 5% and 10% deficiency level, but did affect the accuracy at 15% deficiency level. CONCLUSION. Deficiencies in the scanned images of a scan body can decrease the accuracy of the implant positioning in CAD software when the defect is large, thus leading to the incorrect fabrication of implant prostheses. [ J Adv

Evaluation of the Trueness of Digital Implant Impressions According to the Implant Scan Body Orientation and Scanning Method

“…However, the present study confirmed that a meticulous full scan of the entire areas of the ISBs is important even when scanning an implant case using ISBs. This is consistent with the finding of Park et al that the imaging deficiency of the ISB influenced the position of the virtual implant; these authors suggested that a surface area deficiency of more than 10% in an ISB should be avoided [24].…”

“…Most previous studies have investigated either complete or partial but multiple edentulous cases, and there have been very few studies on the accuracy of implant digital impressions according to the ISB orientation or scanning method in cases of single implants. One previous study found that the deficiency of the scanned image of the ISB affects the position of the virtual implant in the single implant case, but that study only considered a single oral scanner, and it simulated deficient scan images experimentally after completing the scanning procedure [24].…”

The Effect of Perioral Scan and Artificial Skin Markers on the Accuracy of Virtual Dentofacial Integration: Stereophotogrammetry Versus Smartphone Three-Dimensional Face-Scanning

“…Effective shape and size of markers should be investigated to reduce the faulty processing of digitization in further studies. In addition, the scan strategy, image reconstruction software, operator experience are another major factors influencing the quality of a scan [ 41 , 42 , 43 ].…”

The Accuracy Of Digital Versus Conventional Open Tray Implant Impression Technique, In Partially Edentulous Patients.

“…The opposite is correct as well, in that, absent data points in a point cloud will lead to difficulties when the surface geometry is reconstructed, which might cause multiple errors when attempting to register the image and associate the ISB surface with the implant library which means true image matching is impossible. 1,6 IOS systems are known to be open, closed, and semi-closed architectures, which is an indication of the degree of flexibility in importing and exporting digital files. Many authors have recommended open or semi-closed systems as they offer the laboratory and clinician more freedom and flexibility.…”