Digital impressions in dentistry—accuracy of impression digitalisation by desktop scanners

Accuracy of measurements on CBCT-generated digital models using different exposure parameters (in vitro study)

INTRODUCTION

Dental imaging comprises a wide range of techniques and modalities, each with different diagnostic features influenced by numerous parameters, all of which contribute to the precision and effectiveness of dental evaluations and treatments. This study examined the dimensional reproducibility of arch measurements from CBCT scans with different voxel sizes and exposure parameters compared to a reference model from Extra-oral scanners (EOS) and how these parameters affected digital matching and diagnostic image quality.

METHODS

A diagnostic observational study of arch dimensions, including inter-canine, inter-premolar, intermolar, arch width and arch length, was conducted on digital models (DMs) created from 65 CBCT scans of a full dentate epoxy maxillary model. The measurements obtained from EOS scans served as the control for the study. Normality was tested with the Shapiro-Wilk test, comparisons used the Kruskal-Wallis test with Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons for significant results, and data were analysed using IBM SPSS (Version 26.0), with significance set at p < .05.

RESULTS

Significant deviations were revealed among study groups, with group I (smallest voxel size) consistently displaying the lowest values, mean (SD) deviation was reported as 0.01 (0.006) and group IV (lowest kV value) exhibiting the highest deviations, mean (SD) deviation of 0.16 (0.17).

CONCLUSION

Combining a small voxel size (0.12 mm) with high milliampere (8 mA) and kilovoltage (90 kV) settings in CBCT ensured detailed anatomical visualization and accurate linear measurements, crucial for precise dental assessments, and emphasizing the necessity for strict control over CBCT parameters in dental applications.

Comparison between Conventional and Digital Workflow in Implant Prosthetic Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The progress of digital technologies in dental prosthodontics is fast and increasingly accurate, allowing practitioners to simplify their daily work. These technologies aim to substitute conventional techniques progressively, but their real efficiency and predictability are still under debate. Many systematic reviews emphasize the lack of clinical RCTs that compare digital and traditional workflow. To address this evidence, we conducted a three-arm designed clinical RCT, which compares fully digital, combined digital, and analogic and fully analog workflows. We aimed to compare the clinical properties of each workflow regarding interproximal (IC) and occlusal contact (OC), marginal fit, impression time (IT), and patient satisfaction through a VAS scale. In total, 72 patients were included in the study. The IC and OC of the digital workflow were better than the others (p < 0.001), which obtained similar results. No difference between implant-abutment fit was observed (p = 0.5966). The IT was shorter in the digital workflow than the others (p < 0.001), which were similar. Patient satisfaction was higher in the digital workflow than in the conventional one. Despite the limitations, this study's results support better accuracy and patient tolerance of digital workflow than of conventional techniques, suggesting it as a viable alternative to the latter when performed by clinicians experienced in digital dentistry.

The internal and marginal adaptation of lithium disilicate endocrowns fabricated using intra and extraoral scanners: An in-vitro study

OBJECTIVES

The impression technique highly influences the adaptation of ceramic restorations. Not enough information is available to compare the marginal (MF) and internal fit (IF) of endocrowns fabricated with various digitization techniques. Therefore, this in-vitro study aimed to compare the MF and IF of lithium disilicate (LDS) endocrowns fabricated through direct and indirect digital scanning methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One extracted maxillary molar was used to fabricate endocrowns. The digitization of the model was performed with (G1) direct scanning (n = 10) utilizing an intraoral scanner (IOS), (G2) indirectly scanning the conventional impression taken from the model using the same IOS (n = 10), (G3) indirectly digitalizing the obtained impression using an extraoral scanner (EOS) (n = 10), and (G4) scanning the poured cast using the same EOS (n = 10). The MF and IF of the endocrowns were measured using the replica method and a digital stereomicroscope. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze data.

RESULTS

The studied groups differed significantly (p<0.001). G2 (130.31±7.87 μm) and G3 (48.43±19.14 μm) showed the largest and smallest mean vertical marginal gap, respectively. G2 and G3 led to the highest and lowest internal gaps in all regions, respectively. With significant differences among the internal regions (p<0.001), the pulpal area demonstrated the most considerable misfit in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Scanning the impression using an extraoral scanner showed smaller marginal and internal gaps.

Clear guidance to select the most accurate technologies for 3D printing dental models - A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Thus far, the findings of numerous studies conducted on the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) printed dental models are conflicting. Therefore, the aim of the network meta-analysis (NMA) is to determine the accuracy of 3D printed dental models compared with digital reference models.

DATA

Studies comparing the accuracy of 3D printed full-arch dental models manufactured using different printing techniques to initial STL files were included.

SOURCES

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021285863). An electronic search was performed across four databases in November 2021, and search was restricted to the English language.

STUDY SELECTION

A systematic search was conducted based on a prespecified search query. 16,303 articles were pooled after the removal of the duplicates. Following study selection and data extraction, 11 eligible studies were included in the NMA in 6 subgroups. The outcomes were specified as trueness and precision and expressed as root mean square (RMS) and absolute mean deviation values. Seven printing technologies were analyzed: stereolithography (SLA), digital light processing (DLP), fused deposition modeling/fused filament fabrication (FDM/FFF), MultiJet, PolyJet, continuous liquid interface production (CLIP), and LCD technology. The QUADAS-2 and GRADE were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

SLA, DLP, and PolyJet technologies were the most accurate in producing precise full-arch dental models.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The findings of the NMA suggest that SLA, DLP, and PolyJet technologies are sufficiently accurate for full-arch dental model production for prosthodontic purposes. In contrast, FDM/FFF, CLIP, and LCD technologies are less suitable for manufacturing dental devices.

The precision of two alternative indirect workflows for digital model production: an illusion or a possibility?

OBJECTIVE

Despite the clear drive from both research and clinical dentistry toward digital transformation, there are limitations to implementing intra-oral scanning (IOS) into daily dental practice. This study aimed to compare the precision of digital models obtained from two alternative indirect workflows to direct IOS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two indirect digital workflows were evaluated in this study. In the IOS group (direct), IOS directly obtained digital impressions of participants' upper and lower dental arches, while in the Scan Impression (Scan Imp) group (indirect), a desktop scanner scanned silicone-based impressions of upper and lower whole arches that were taken with plastic trays. In the cone-beam computed tomography impression (CBCT Imp) group (indirect), a CBCT machine scanned the silicone-based impressions. Then, the precision of the entire arch and individual teeth for all digital impressions was virtually quantified. Following superimposition, differences between standard tessellation language (STL) files obtained from both-direct and indirect-methods were evaluated by color-mapping and measuring the surface distance between superimposed STL files. Furthermore, 18 linear measurements were taken from each digital model. ANOVA with repeated measures, Pearson coefficient, and intraclass correlation coefficient were used for intergroup comparisons.

RESULTS

The digital models obtained from the two indirect workflows differed from the IOS in some dental and intra-arch measurements but were considered clinically acceptable. Ranked against IOS, CBCT Imp models had greater precision, followed by Scan Imp.

CONCLUSION

Digital models obtained from two indirect, alternative workflows, desktop, and CBCT scanning of impression, have clinically acceptable accuracy and reliability of tooth size and intra-arch measurements, providing the use of proper methodologies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There are some limitations to implementing IOS in daily clinical practice. However, several alternative digital model production techniques might provide an affordable solution. Although they may insignificantly differ in accuracy, all can be applied clinically.

Accuracy of Additively Manufactured Dental Casts Compared with That of Virtual Scan Data Obtained with an Intraoral Scanner: An In Vitro Study

The study aimed to evaluate the time-related accuracy of additively manufactured dental casts and to compare it with scan data obtained with an intraoral scanner in vitro. Twenty-eight markers were attached to a set of dentiforms as reference model, and the distances between the markers were measured using a digital caliper. An intraoral scanner was used to obtain the virtual scan data of the reference model with a total of 30 scans per arch. The distances between markers were measured using a three-dimensional inspection software for all scans (group IOS). Scan data were additively manufactured using a 3D printer, and the distances between markers were measured as in the reference model immediately after post-polymerization (group PPIA), 1 day (group PP1D), 7 days (group PP7D), and 30 days after post-polymerization (group PP30D). The linear deviation in group IOS was 199.74 ± 11.14 μm, PPIA was 242.88 ± 49 μm, PP1D was 259.9 ± 42.59 μm, PP7D was 289.82 ± 39.74 μm, and PP30D was 315.8 ± 33.28 μm, in comparison with the reference model, with significant differences among all groups (all p < 0.05). When additively manufacturing casts from scan data to verify the quality of dental prostheses designed virtually, the prostheses should be adapted to casts manufactured within one week.

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

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.

The accuracy of gypsum casts obtained from the disinfected extended-pour alginate impressions through prolonged storage times

Background

Manufacturers of the extended-pour alginates claimed their dimensional stability through prolonged storage. No data confirmed the ability of these materials to maintain their dimensions and the reproduced oral details following their chemical disinfection. Therefore, this study evaluated the dimensional stability and surface detail reproduction of gypsum casts obtained from disinfected extended-pour alginate impressions through different storage time intervals.

Methods

Two hundred and forty three hydrocolloid impressions were made from one conventional (Tropicalgin) and two extended-pour (Hydrogum 5 and Chromaprint premium) alginates. These impressions were subjected to none, spray and immersion disinfection before their storage in 100% humidity for 0, 72 and 120 h. The dimensional stability and the surface detail reproduction were indirectly evaluated under low angle illumination on the resulted gypsum casts. At α = 0.05, the parametric dimensional stability data were analyzed using One-Way ANOVA and Tukey’s comparisons, while the nonparametric detail reproduction data were analyzed using KrusKal Wallis and Mann–Whitney's tests.

Results

All gypsum casts exhibited a degree of expansion; however, the recorded expansion values did not differ between test categories (P > 0.05). Generally, casts obtained from spray-disinfected impressions showed lower detail accuracy (P < 0.05). Immersion-disinfected extended-pour alginates produced casts with better detail accuracy following 120 h of storage (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

All alginates materials offer comparable cast dimensions under different testing circumstances. Extended-pour alginates offer casts with superior surface details following their immersion disinfection and 120 h of storage. Spray-disinfection using 5.25% sodium hypochlorite affects the surface details of casts obtained from conventional and extended-pour alginates adversely.

Trueness evaluation of digital impression: The impact of the selection of reference and test object

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the importance of defining the reference and the test object during 3D surface comparisons to assess the trueness of an intraoral scanner.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A maxillary complete-arch cast with interdental spaces was digitized with a high-resolution scanner to obtain the ground truth dataset [GT]. Fifteen intraoral scanning datasets [IOS] were obtained with an intraoral scanner. The trueness of the [IOS] datasets were evaluated by two different comparison procedures using a 3D analysis software: In the first comparison [REF-GT], the [GT] dataset was set as reference object and the [IOS] dataset was defined as test object. In the second comparison [REF-IOS], the [IOS] dataset were set as reference object and the [GT] dataset was defined as test object. The mean trueness of both comparisons was calculated with absolute mean deviation, (90-10)/2 percentile, and root-mean-squared (RMS) error method. Statistical significance was analyzed using the t-test (α=0.05).

RESULTS

The mean trueness values of [REF-GT] were 31.4(±6.1) µm for (90-10)/2 percentile, 77.0(±5.3) µm for absolute mean deviation, and 203.1(±4.8) µm for RMS error method. [REF-IOS] revealed 23.9(±4.8) µm, 28.3(±6.3) µm, and 39.6(±9.5) µm, respectively. The results differed significantly.

CONCLUSION

The datasets obtained from the intraoral scanner captured more adequately interproximal spaces in comparison to the [GT] dataset. Therefore, the [GT] dataset defined as reference object in the analysis software for 3D comparisons revealed misleading results.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The selection of the reference object and of the areas to be compared have to be defined carefully regarding complete arch scanning accuracy analysis.

3D Virtual Patient Representation for Guiding a Maxillary Overdenture Fabrication: A Dental Technique

This report describes a technique to obtain a 3D virtual representation of a maxillary edentulous patient guided by an additively manufactured intraoral scan body. The intraoral scan body incorporated a custom tray and occlusion rim which facilitated the acquiring of a digital definitive cast, maxillary occlusion rim position, interocclusal registration, and guided the integration of the facial scans. The technique simplified the design and manufacturing of the maxillary overdenture.

Dental implant location via surface scanner: a pilot study

Purpose

Implant location is performed after placement to verify that the safety of neighboring anatomic structure and the realizability of prosthetic plan. Routine postoperative location is based on radiological scanning and raises the concerns on radiation exposure and inconveniency in practice. In the present study a location method based on surface scanning was introduced and the accuracy of this method was assessed in vitro.

Material and methods

A total of 40 implants were placed in 10 resin mandible models. The models were scanned with intraoral scanner (IS group) and extraoral scanner (ES group). The implant position was located with fusing the images of surface scanning and cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) after implant placement. Deviations were measured between positions located by surface scanner and postoperative CBCT with the parameters: central deviation at apex (cda), central deviation at hex (cdh), horizontal deviation at apex (hda), horizontal deviation at hex (hdh), vertical deviation at apex (vda), vertical deviation at hex (vdh) and angular deviation (ad).

Results

In IS group, the mean value of cda, cdh, hda, hdh, vda, vdh and ad was 0.27 mm, 0.23 mm, 0.12 mm, 0.10 mm, 0.21 mm, 0.19 mm and 0.72°, respectively. In ES group, the mean value of cda, cdh, hda, hdh, vda, vdh and ad was 0.28 mm, 0.25 mm 0.14 mm, 0.11 mm, 0.22 mm, 0.20 mm and 0.68°, respectively. The implant deviations in IS and ES groups were of no significant difference for any of the measurements.

Conclusions

Dental implant can be located via surface scanner with acceptable accuracy for postoperative verification. Further clinical investigation is needed to assess the feasibility of the method.

Does a fully digital workflow improve the accuracy of computer-assisted implant surgery in partially edentulous patients? A systematic review of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Accurate implant placement is essential in reducing post-treatment complications and in ensuring a successful treatment outcome.

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of fully-guided static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS) using partially- and fully-digital workflows.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic and manual literature searches were performed to collect evidence concerning the accuracy of fully-guided s-CAIS procedures utilizing tooth-supported guides. Quantitative analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of partially- and fully-digital workflows, and survival rates and complications were qualitatively analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including 6 randomized controlled trials and 7 prospective clinical studies, were selected for quantitative and qualitative synthesis. A total of 669 implants in 325 patients using s-CAIS were available for review. Meta-analysis of the accuracy revealed a total mean angular deviation of 2.68° (95% CI: 2.32°-3.03°); mean global coronal deviation of 1.03 mm (95% CI: 0.88-1.18 mm); mean global apical deviation of 1.33 mm (95% CI: 1.17-1.50 mm); and mean depth deviation of 0.59 mm (95% CI: 0.46-0.70 mm). Minimal differences were found between the two different workflows. Few complications were reported, and survival rates were between 97.8% to 100% (range of follow-up: 12 to 24 months) in the available studies.

CONCLUSION

Similar accuracy is obtained when implants are placed in partially edentulous patients using fully-guided s-CAIS, independently of the workflow utilized.

3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review

The advent of new technologies in the field of medicine and dentistry is giving improvements that lead the clinicians to have materials and procedures able to improve patients' quality of life. In dentistry, the last digital techniques offer a fully digital computerized workflow that does not include the standard multiple traditional phases. The purpose of this study is to evaluate all clinical trials and clinical randomized trials related to the digital or dental impression technique in prosthetic dentistry trying to give the readers global information about advantages and disadvantages of each procedure. Data collection was conducted in the main scientific search engines, including articles from the last 10 years, in order to obtain results that do not concern obsolete impression techniques. Elsevier, Pubmed and Embase have been screened as sources for performing the research. The results data demonstrated how the working time appears to be improved with digital workflow, but without a significant result (P = 0.72596). The papers have been selected following the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) question, which is related to the progress on dental impression materials and technique. The comparison between dentists or practitioners with respect to classic impression procedures, and students open to new device and digital techniques seem to be the key factor on the final impression technique choice. Surely, digital techniques will end up supplanting the analogical ones altogether, improving the quality of oral rehabilitations, the economics of dental practice and also the perception by our patients.

Reliability of a Virtual Prosthodontic Project Realized through a 2D and 3D Photographic Acquisition: An Experimental Study on the Accuracy of Different Digital Systems

AIMS

The study aims to assess the accuracy of digital planning in dentistry, evaluating the characteristics of different intraoral 3D scanners and comparing it with traditional imaging 2D recording methods. Specifically, using computer aided design (CAD) software and measuring inside CAD software, authors want to verify the reliability of different models obtained with different techniques and machines.

METHODS

12 patients that needed aesthetic restorative treatment were enrolled in the study. All the patients underwent recording data of the height and width dental elements 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 size using different technologies and comparing 2D with 3D methods. A T test was then applied in order to verify whether there was a statistically significant difference between the measurements obtained, comparing the different tools data (Emerald, TRIOS, Photogrammetry and DSS (Digital Smile System)) with the reference values.

RESULTS

No significant differences emerged in the measurements made with the different scanners (Trios 3Shape ®, Planmeca Emerald ®) and photogrammetry. Therefore, what should be underlined regarding the 2D measurements is the speed and simplicity compared to all 3D techniques, so this work can help to better define the field of application and the limits connected to 2D techniques, giving a good window of the technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The low number of patients is not sufficient to provide statistically significant results, but the digital planning future prospects seem to be promising. This study results highlighted how a photogrammetric scanner for dental arches would only have a much smaller shooting field size and greater accuracy. Despite these considerations, the photogrammetric facial scanner provided excellent results for the measurement of individual teeth, showing a great versatility of use.