Aug 2026· International Dental Journal· Vol 76· 0 citations· 49 references
Medicine
TL;DR
Evaluating how different ISB designs affect the trueness and precision of digital impressions in a completely edentulous maxillary arch with multiple implants found significant differences were found among ISBs in both trueness and precision.
Abstract
Background Achieving a passive and accurate fit in full-arch implant-supported prostheses remains a significant challenge in digital dentistry. Intraoral scan bodies (ISBs) are essential components for transferring implant positions digitally. However, variations in ISB material, geometry, and height may influence the accuracy and precision of intraoral scans. This study aimed to evaluate how different ISB designs affect the trueness and precision of digital impressions in a completely edentulous maxillary arch with multiple implants. Methods An in vitro model with 8 implants was scanned using the Primescan intraoral scanner. Five ISB configurations were tested: four from different manufacturers (ELOS, GT Medical, ZIACOM, and 3Shape) and a fifth mixed group with alternating ISBs. A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used as the reference standard. Accuracy was assessed through linear (Euclidean distance) and angular (relative angulation) measurements. Statistical comparisons included ANOVA, pairwise analysis, and multivariate regression. Results Significant differences were found among ISBs in both trueness and precision. ZIACOM showed the best precision overall, particularly in repeated linear (21 ± 16 μm) and angular measurements (0.102± 0.081 degrees), while ELOS displayed the lowest deviation in linear distance (40 ± 33 μm). The mixed ISB group yielded the highest variability and the most extreme errors. Although mean values were within clinically acceptable limits, maximum deviations reached 223 µm and 1.2°, potentially compromising passive fit. Conclusions ISB selection significantly affects the accuracy and reproducibility of intraoral scans in full-arch implant scenarios. Using a consistent ISB system is recommended, as mixing components from different manufacturers may increase variability and compromise the reliability of digital impressions in complex rehabilitations.
Background This study compared the accuracy of different scan body geometries under different implant angulation and interimplant distance conditions. Evidence regarding full-arch digital implant scanning under these conditions remains limited. Material/Methods In this in vitro study, 5 implants were placed in maxillary edentulous plaster models representing 3 implant systems (Bioinfinity, Meisinger, and Mode). The reference implant was positioned perpendicular to the ridge crest at the midline. Implant angulations (5° and 10°) and interimplant distances (5 mm and 10 mm) were standardized. Scan bodies were attached to the master model, and each model was scanned 10 times using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 5). Three-dimensional deviations were calculated. Data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (α = 0.05). Results No significant differences were observed among the groups at 5° angulation (P > 0.05), whereas significant differences were detected at 10° angulation for implants 1 and 5 (P < 0.01). Bioinfinity showed higher deviation values at implant 1, while Meisinger demonstrated higher deviations at implant 5. At a 10-mm interimplant distance (implants 1 and 2), significant differences were found among the groups (P < 0.001), with Bioinfinity exhibiting lower deviation values. At a 5-mm distance, no significant difference was observed at implant 4 (P > 0.05), whereas a significant difference was found at implant 5 (P < 0.001), with the highest deviation in the Meisinger group. Conclusions Increased implant angulation and interimplant distance are associated with reduced accuracy and higher deviation values in digital full-arch scans. The influence of scan body geometry varies depending on implant position.
Ebru Sümer Ekin, Sozdar Başkan Uyar, Merve Güler et al.· Medical Science Monitor· 0 citations
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of different scan body extension designs on the accuracy, usability, and feasibility of digital full-arch implant impressions in an edentulous mandibular model. Accuracy was expressed as trueness and precision, usability as scan time, and feasibility as the number of total scan failures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An edentulous mandibular model with four implants was fabricated with minimal surface morphology. Five scan body extension configurations were tested: no extensions (control), commercially available extensions, conventional impression copings used as extensions, and two morphological 3D-printed extensions oriented between adjacent implants or toward the center of the arch. Two intraoral scanners were used. For each scanner and configuration, 30 scans were acquired. Inter-implant distances were compared against coordinate measuring machine reference values. Trueness was assessed as mean absolute deviation, precision as standard deviation, and differences were analyzed with non-parametric tests.
RESULTS
The highly morphological scan body extensions produced the most consistent improvements. Combined across scanners, trueness improved by 40-57 μm relative to control for the longest inter-implant span. Precision improved significantly for the center-oriented configuration. All scan body extension techniques reduced scan time by 18%-41% and reduced scan failures from 13% (control) to 3% for the morphological designs. Improvements were most pronounced for longer spans and varied between scanners.
CONCLUSIONS
Highly morphological 3D-printed scan body extensions significantly improved the accuracy, usability, and feasibility of complete-arch digital implant impressions compared to an unmodified control workflow. Clinical validation is required to confirm these findings for broader use.
J. Baranowski, Michael Braian, V. Stenport et al.· Clinical Oral Implants Resea...· 0 citations
Introduction This in vitro study assessed the accuracy of full-arch edentulous impressions obtained via intraoral scanning using various scanning strategies. This study aimed to evaluate whether the addition of surface markers would enhance scan precision in various anatomical regions of edentulous models, particularly on low-feature and smooth surfaces. Materials and Methods Sixty scans (30 maxillary and 30 mandibular) were performed using an intraoral scanner across three scanning protocols: unmodified (control), composite-resin, and drawn-line markers. Reference scans were obtained using a laboratory scanner. Scans were evaluated in four anatomical regions: the vestibule, residual ridge, palate/lingual area, and overall surface. Deviations were measured using the root mean square, mean deviation, and standard deviation. Two-way analysis of variance, with Tukey’s post hoc test, was used for the statistical analysis. Results The scanning strategy had no significant effect on the residual ridge area (p = .918). The jaw type significantly affected the scanning accuracy in all areas (p < .001), with greater deviations observed in the mandibular scans. Composite-resin and line marker strategies increased the accuracy in the mandibular vestibular and lingual regions. All root mean square error values remained within the clinically acceptable limits, although the numerical differences between the groups were minimal. Conclusion Full-arch intraoral scanning of edentulous models demonstrated clinically acceptable accuracy, within the limitations of this in vitro study. Surface markers did not provide a significant advantage in the maxillary scans but may improve scanning performance in mandibular regions. These findings provide methodological insights into scanning performance on smooth and low-feature surfaces and should be interpreted cautiously when extrapolating to clinical intraoral conditions.
Emel Arslan, H. Yemenoğlu· Journal of Applied Dentistry...· 0 citations
The type of scan body did not significantly affect the accuracy of digital impressions for bone-level implants and the mean and standard deviation of Root Mean Square Eror (RMSE) were calculated.
A. Fathi, Ehsan Ghasemi, Seyyed Parsa Tabatabaei et al.· Journal of Oral Implantology· 0 citations
Objective: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of implant vertical positioning on the accuracy of digital and conventional impressions for single implants using three-dimensional superimposition analysis.Material and Methods: A master model with a single implant analog (Biohorizons, 5.7 mm) was prepared at three different gingival depths (2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm) in the mandibular first molar region. Digital impressions were obtained using two intraoral scanners (Trios 3Shape and Cerec Omnicam), while conventional impressions were taken using polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) and condensation silicone (Type C silicone). In total, 96 test models (n=8 per group) were generated. All models were digitized and compared to the reference STL model using reverse-engineering software (Rapidform) for 3D deviation analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α=0.05).Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between the digital impression groups (p>0.05). Among conventional techniques, the group using C-silicone showed significantly higher deviations than the PVS group (p
Vildan Aslıyüce, Nihal Özcan, Elif Yiğit İren et al.· Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Tıp F...· 0 citations
Completely edentulous mandibles present a challenge for accurate intraoral scanning, which can compromise the passive fit of implant-supported restorations. Reverse scan bodies may improve the accuracy of implant position transfer and support a fully digital workflow. However, clinical evidence for their use in the edentulous mandible remains limited. In this single-patient prospective clinical evaluation, one fully edentulous mandible restored with two interforaminal implants was scanned ten times using an intraoral scanner (IOS). Based on each scan, titanium verification bars (VBs) were fabricated, and their passive fit was assessed clinically. After sectioning and intraoral re-splinting, splinted verification bars (SVBs) were digitized using reverse scan bodies and a laboratory scanner to fabricate new verification bars (NVBs). Linear and angular deviations between datasets (IOS, VB, SVB, NVB) were analyzed using metrology software and statistically evaluated with Welch’s ANOVA and post hoc tests (α = 0.05). All VBs and NVBs demonstrated passive fit clinically. Mean linear deviations were 12 μm between IOS and VB, 50 μm between VB and SVB (p = 0.001), and 26 μm between SVB and NVB (p = 0.20). Mean angular deviations were 0.18° between IOS and VB, with six measurements > 0.4°; 0.79° between VB and SVB (p = 0.01), with seven measurements > 0.4°; and 0.06° between SVB and NVB, with four measurements > 0.4°. Within the limitations of this single-patient evaluation and the favorable two-implant mandibular configuration, intraoral scanning provided sufficient accuracy for fabricating passively fitting restorations on two implants in the edentulous mandible. Measurable linear and angular deviations did not compromise clinical fit in this case. The use of reverse scan bodies may be effective in cases of misfit after intraoral re-splinting, especially in more complex full-arch workflows, as only minor linear and angular deviations were observed in the NVBs with integrated abutments.
A. Kernen-Gintaute, M. Akulauskas, F. Kernen et al.· BMC Oral Health· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
