The Influence of Using Different Types of Scan Bodies on the Transfer Accuracy of Implant Position: An In Vitro Study

Accuracy of digital implant impressions in clinical studies: A systematic review

“…Regardless of the manufacturer, a structure that can be clearly detected by the IOS should be used. Furthermore, only scanbodies stored in the software library of the scanner or corresponding CAD software should be used (Schmidt et al, 2019; Schmidt et al, 2021b). For everyday clinical use, it should also be noted that the data from a received IOS are not used directly, but are first processed into a digital model using model builder software.…”

“…This is the only possible way to ensure that the extraoral model represents the intraoral situation with maximum accuracy. Moreover, the fabrication of implant‐supported prosthodontic restorations needs a high degree of accuracy (Schmidt et al, 2019; Schmidt et al, 2021b; Schmidt, Rein, et al, 2021). While restoring natural teeth, minor inaccuracies can be compensated by their inherent mobility, which is not possible in case of implants as they have a 10‐fold lower inherent mobility than natural teeth (Chang et al, 2012; Winter, Klein, & Karl, 2013a,b).…”

“…However, even though the digital system should help avoid errors in the conventional process chain, errors can also occur in the digital workflow. The selected scanpath (Ender & Mehl, 2013; Müller et al, 2016), the user (Rutkunas et al, 2017), a lack of calibration (Rehmann et al, 2017), the software or hardware version (Haddadi et al, 2018; Schmidt, Schlenz, et al, 2021; Shim et al, 2015; Vag et al, 2021), and scanbody used (Schmidt et al, 2019; Schmidt et al, 2021b) are possible factors that influence the accuracy.…”

The Influence of Hard- and Software Improvement of Intraoral Scanners on the Implant Transfer Accuracy from 2012 to 2021: An In Vitro Study

“…The analyses were based on evaluation methods already known and used in a previous study [26]; for this purpose, all scan data were first exported to a standard STL file format.…”

“…Thus, implant models represent identical basic situations. Therefore, in order to eliminate possible external influences such as different study setups, the influence of scanbodies, or measuring strategies [4,16,[24][25][26] in the present study, two investigators assessed the transfer accuracy (trueness and precision) of three different IOS families using different hardware and software versions from 2012 to 2021 and compared them to a conventional impression (CI) on the same implant model over a period of ten years. According to ISO 5725-1, mean values for the deviations between the IOS results and the master model describing trueness and standard deviation describing precision for the different scanners and the CI [27].…”