Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update.


ABSTRACT: The aim of this clinical study was to update the available data in the literature regarding the transfer accuracy (trueness/precision) of four current intraoral scanners (IOS) equipped with the latest software versions and to compare these data with conventional impressions (CVI). A metallic reference aid served as a reference dataset. Four digital impressions (Trios3Cart, Trios3Pod, Trios4Pod, and Primescan) and one CVI were investigated in five patients. Scan data were analyzed using three-dimensional analysis software and conventional models using a coordinate measurement machine. The transfer accuracy between the reference aid and the impression methods were compared. Differences with p < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Overall, mean ± standard deviation (SD) transfer accuracy ranged from 24.6 ± 17.7 µm (CVI) to 204.5 ± 182.1 µm (Trios3Pod). The Primescan yielded the lowest deviation for digital impressions (33.8 ± 31.5 µm), followed by Trios4Pod (65.2 ± 52.9 µm), Trios3Cart (84.7 ± 120.3 µm), and Trios3Pod. Within the limitations of this study, current IOS equipped with the latest software versions demonstrated less deviation for short-span distances compared with the conventional impression technique. However, for long-span distances, the conventional impression technique provided the lowest deviation. Overall, currently available IOS systems demonstrated improvement regarding transfer accuracy of full-arch scans in patients.

SUBMITTER: Schmidt A 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7141355 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update.

Schmidt Alexander A   Klussmann Leona L   Wöstmann Bernd B   Schlenz Maximiliane Amelie MA  

Journal of clinical medicine 20200304 3


The aim of this clinical study was to update the available data in the literature regarding the transfer accuracy (trueness/precision) of four current intraoral scanners (IOS) equipped with the latest software versions and to compare these data with conventional impressions (CVI). A metallic reference aid served as a reference dataset. Four digital impressions (Trios3Cart, Trios3Pod, Trios4Pod, and Primescan) and one CVI were investigated in five patients. Scan data were analyzed using three-dim  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC6136706 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5455646 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC7071446 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10729975 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6636111 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8652366 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10280615 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7063212 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6201884 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8407084 | biostudies-literature