Investigation of the Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners in Mandibular Full-Arch Digital Implant Impression: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Adolfo Di Fiore, Lorenzo Graiff, Gianpaolo Savio, Stefano Granata, Michele Basilicata, Patrizio Bollero and Roberto Meneghello
Additional contact information
Adolfo Di Fiore: Department of Neurosciences, Section of Prosthetic and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Lorenzo Graiff: Department of Neurosciences, Section of Prosthetic and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Gianpaolo Savio: Departments of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Stefano Granata: Department of Neurosciences, Section of Prosthetic and Digital Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Michele Basilicata: Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Roma, Italy
Patrizio Bollero: Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Roma, Italy
Roberto Meneghello: Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 8, 1-6

Abstract: Background: We compare the accuracy of new intraoral scanners (IOSs) in full-arch digital implant impressions. Methods: A master model with six scan bodies was milled in poly(methyl methacrylate), measured by using a coordinate measuring machine, and scanned 15 times with four IOSs: PrimeScan, Medit i500, Vatech EZ scan, and iTero. The software was developed to identify the position points on each scan body. The 3D position and distance analysis were performed. Results: The average and ± standard deviation of the 3D position analysis was 29 μm ± 6 μm for PrimeScan, 39 μm ± 6 μm for iTero, 48 μm ± 18 μm for Mediti500, and 118 μm ± 24 μm for Vatech EZ scan ( p < 0.05). Conclusions: All IOSs are able to make a digital complete implant impression in vitro according to the average misfit value reported in literature (150 μm); however, the 3D distance analysis showed that only the Primescan and iTero presented negligible systematic error sources.

Keywords: CAD/CAM; digital impression; intra-oral scanner; accuracy; full arch; dental implant (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4719/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/8/4719/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:8:p:4719-:d:793286

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().