Laboratory Tests of Metrological Characteristics of a Non-Repetitive Low-Cost Mobile Handheld Laser Scanner.

The popularity of mobile laser scanning systems as a surveying tool is growing among construction contractors, architects, land surveyors, and urban planners. The user-friendliness and rapid capture of precise and complete data on places and objects make them serious competitors for traditional surveying approaches. Considering the low cost and constantly improving availability of Mobile Laser Scanning (MLS), mainly handheld surveying tools, the measurement possibilities seem unlimited. We conducted a comprehensive investigation into the quality and accuracy of a point cloud generated by a recently marketed low-cost mobile surveying system, the MandEye MLS. The purpose of the study is to conduct exhaustive laboratory tests to determine the actual metrological characteristics of the device. The test facility was the surveying laboratory of the University of Agriculture in Kraków. The results of the MLS measurements (dynamic and static) were juxtaposed with a reference base, a geometric system of reference points in the laboratory, and in relation to a reference point cloud from a higher-class laser scanner: Leica ScanStation P40 TLS. The Authors verified the geometry of the point cloud, technical parameters, and data structure, as well as whether it can be used for surveying and mapping objects by assessing the point cloud density, noise and measurement errors, and detectability of objects in the cloud.

Effect of preparation design and scan pattern on the accuracy of intraoral scans for complete arch laminate veneers under simulated intraoral variables.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of different preparation designs and scan patterns on the accuracy of intraoral scans for complete-arch maxillary laminate veneers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three maxillary typodonts were used to obtain reference models with three different laminate veneer preparation designs: windows (W), beveled (B), and incisal overlap (IO). Reference scans were obtained with a desktop scanner. A total of 90 complete arch intraoral scans were made with an intraoral scanner (Medit i700) following three different scan patterns: straight motion (SM), zigzag motion (ZM), and combined motion (CM). Ten scans were made in each subgroup and exported as standard tessellation language (STL) files. Assessment of accuracy was conducted with a 3D software analysis program (Geomagic Control X). Each STL file was individually aligned with the reference scan using the best fit algorithm tool, and 3D differences were calculated using the root mean square (RMS) value. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post hoc comparison tests were applied to analyze precision and trueness data (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Two-way ANOVA and post hoc comparison tests revealed significant differences among different preparation designs and scan patterns (p < 0.05). Regarding trueness, the IO when scanned with SM presented higher mean RMS than the other preparation designs (W and B) scanned with the same scanning pattern (p < 0.05). Regarding precision, the groups of W and IO presented significantly higher mean RMS than the group of B when scanned with ZM (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of intraoral scans for complete-arch laminate veneers was affected by different laminate veneer preparation designs and scan patterns. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Modifying scan pattern according to preparation design helps to improve scan accuracy for complete-arch laminate veneers.

Effect of using scan body accessories and inter-implant distances on the accuracy of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.

PURPOSE: To introduce a novel design for scan body accessory parts that are reusable, easy to attach and detach without permanent change of the scan body, and can be used with different inter-implant distances to enhance the accuracy of complete arch implant scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) model with a soft tissue replica was fabricated with four implant analogs located at tooth positions 17, 13, 22, and 27 with 18, 25, and 30 mm inter-implant distances. Four scan bodies (SBs) were attached to the implants. The model was scanned with a laboratory scanner to be used as a reference scan. A total of 40 scans were made with the same intraoral scanner and they were divided equally into two groups. Group A: Complete arch implant scans without scan body accessories (n = 20), and Group B: Complete arch implant scans with scan body accessories (n = 20). Intraoral scans were exported and superimposed on the reference scan using reverse engineering inspection software to be evaluated for 3D deviations, angular deviations, and linear deviations. Statistical analysis was performed with student t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures followed by post hoc adjusted Bonferroni test. The level of significance was set at P = 0.05. RESULTS: The scan body accessories decreased both the 3D and linear deviations, with a statistically significant difference at SB4 for the 3D deviation (P = 0.043) and the linear inter-implant discrepancies between SB1-SB2 and SB3-SB4 (P = 0.029 and < 0.001), respectively. However, there was no statistically significant difference in angular deviation between the study groups. Implant positions had significant differences within each group. CONCLUSIONS:  A significant improvement in the accuracy of the complete arch implant digital impression was achieved by using the scan body accessories, particularly in reducing the 3D and linear deviations at the most distant implant positions.

Influence of arch location and scanning pattern on the scanning accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch intraoral digital implant scans.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the influence of arch location and scanning pattern on the accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch implant scans acquired using an intraoral scanner (IOS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary (maxillary group) and mandibular (mandibular group) model with 6 implant abutments on each cast was digitized using a desktop scanner (control scans). Six subgroups were created based on the scanning pattern used to acquire the scans using an IOS (Trios 4): occluso-buccal-lingual (OBL subgroup), occluso-linguo-buccal (OLB subgroup), bucco-linguo-occlusal (BLO subgroup), linguo-buccal-occlusal (LBO subgroup), zigzag (ZZ subgroup), and circumferential (C subgroup). The control scans were used as a reference to measure the discrepancy with the experimental scans calculating the root mean square error. Two-way ANOVA and the pairwise comparison Tukey tests were used to analyze the data (α = .05). RESULTS: Significant discrepancies in trueness (p < .001), precision (p < .001), scanning time (p < .001), and number of photograms (p < .001) were found. The maxillary group obtained poorer trueness and precision values, higher scanning times, and a larger number of photograms than the mandibular group. The C subgroup obtained the best trueness and precision values, but was not significantly different from the OLB, BLO, and LBO subgroups. The ZZ subgroup obtained the worst trueness and precision values (p < .05). The C subgroup obtained the lowest scanning time and number of photograms (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Arch location and scanning pattern influenced scanning accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch implant scans.

Influence of interdental spaces and the palate on the accuracy of maxillary scans acquired using different intraoral scanners.

PURPOSE: To assess the influence of interdental spaces and scanning the palate on the accuracy of maxillary scans acquired using three intraoral scanners (IOSs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A virtual completely dentate maxillary cast without interdental spaces was obtained and modified to create 1, 2, and 3 mm of interdental spacing between the anterior teeth. These three files (reference standard tessellation language files) were used to print three reference casts. The reference casts were scanned using three IOSs: TRIOS4, iTero Element 5D, and Aoralscan2. Three groups were created based on the interdental spaces: 0, 1, 2, and 3 mm (n = 10). The groups were subdivided into two subgroups: no palate (NP subgroup) and palate (P subgroup). The reference STL files were used to measure the discrepancy with the experimental scans by calculating the root mean square (RMS) error. Three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Tukey pairwise comparison tests were used to analyze trueness. The Levene test was used to analyze precision (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Trueness ranged from 91 to 139 µm and precision ranged from 5 to 23 µm among the subgroups tested. A significant correlation was found between IOS*group (p<0.001) and IOS*subgroup ( p<0.001). Tukey test showed significant trueness differences among the interdental spaces tested (p<0.001). The 1- and 2-mm groups obtained better trueness than the 0- and 3-mm groups (p<0.001). An 11 µm mean trueness discrepancy was measured among the different interdental space groups tested. The P subgroups demonstrated significantly higher trueness when compared to the NP subgroups (p<0.001). The discrepancy between the maxillary scans with and without the palate was 4 µm. Significant precision discrepancies were found (p = 0.008), with the iTero group showing the lowest precision. CONCLUSION: Interdental spaces and incorporation of the palate on maxillary intraoral scans influenced trueness and precision of the three IOSs tested. However, the scanning discrepancy measured may be of no clinical relevance.

Effect of cut-out rescan procedures on the accuracy of an intraoral scanner used for digitizing an ear model: An in vitro study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the rescanning of mesh holes of different diameters on the accuracy of an intraoral scanner (IOS) used to digitize an ear model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An ear model was digitized using an intraoral scanner (Medit i500) to obtain a reference mesh. A baseline experimental scan was created by editing a duplicate of the reference mesh using the cut-out tool of the IOS software. Three equal groups were created based on the diameter of the cut-out areas: 2 mm (G1), 5 mm (G2), and 8 mm (G3) (n = 15). The cut-out areas were rescanned and a total of 45 digital files were exported. The discrepancy between the reference and the experimental digital scans was measured using the root mean square calculation (RMS). The data were analyzed by a Kruskal-Wallis test followed by a post hoc Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The trueness values ranged from 19.53 to 27.13 µm. There were significant differences in the RMS error values among the groups tested (p < 0.001) and post hoc multiple comparisons showed significant differences between the G1 and G2 groups (p = 0.04), G1 and G3 groups (p < 0.001), and G2 and G3 groups (p = 0.004). Overall, the precision values ranged from 4.93 to 7.73 µm and significant differences in the RMS values were only found between the G1 and G2 groups (p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Mesh hole rescanning affected the scanning accuracy (trueness and precision) of the IOS tested. The larger the diameter of the mesh holes, the less the trueness of the IOS tested. The precision values seemed to be less affected compared with the trueness by the cut-out and rescanning procedures.

Three-Dimensional Scanning Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Dental Implant Scan Bodies-An Original Study.

Background and Objectives: With the increased trend towards digitalization in dentistry, intraoral scanning has, to a certain extent, replaced conventional impressions in particular clinical settings. Trueness and precision are essential traits for optical impressions but have so far been incompletely explored. Materials and Methods: We performed a study to evaluate the differences in the three-dimensional spatial orientations of implant analogs on a stone cast when using an intraoral scanner compared to a dental laboratory scanner. We assessed the deviation of the intraoral scans compared to the laboratory scan for three standardized implant measurement plans and compared these results with control scans of the neighboring natural teeth. Results: We found no statistically significant correlation between the measurements at the scan body level and the landmarks chosen as controls on the neighboring natural teeth (p = 0.198). The values for the implant scans presented wider variation compared to the control scans. The difference between the implant and the control planes ranged from -0.018 mm to +0.267 mm, with a median of -0.011 mm (IQR: -0.001-0.031 mm). While most values fell within a clinically acceptable margin of error of 0.05 mm, 12.5% of the measurements fell outside of this acceptable range and could potentially affect the quality of the resulting prosthetic work. Conclusions: For single-unit implant-supported restorations, intraoral scanning might have enough accuracy. However, the differences that result when scanning with an intraoral scanner may affect the quality of prosthetic work on multiple implants, especially if they are screw-retained. Based on our results, we propose different adaptations of the prosthetic protocol to minimize the potential effect of errors that may occur during the digital workflow.

Analysis of the Influence of the Geometrical Parameters of the Body Scanner on the Accuracy of Reconstruction of the Human Figure Using the Photogrammetry Technique.

This article concerns the research of the HUBO full-body scanner, which includes the analysis and selection of the scanner's geometrical parameters in order to obtain the highest possible accuracy of the reconstruction of a human figure. In the scanner version analyzed in this paper, smartphone cameras are used as sensors. In order to process the collected photos into a 3D model, the photogrammetry technique is applied. As part of the work, dependencies between the geometrical parameters of the scanner are derived, which allows to significantly reduce the number of degrees of freedom in the selection of its geometrical parameters. Based on these dependencies, a numerical analysis is carried out, as a result of which the initial values of the geometrical parameters are pre-selected and distribution of scanner cameras is visualized. As part of the experimental research, the influence of selected scanner parameters on the scanning accuracy is analyzed. For the experimental research, a specially prepared dummy was used instead of the participation of a real human, which allowed to ensure the constancy of the scanned object. The accuracy of the object reconstruction was assessed in relation to the reference 3D model obtained with a scanner of superior measurement uncertainty. On the basis of the conducted research, a method for the selection of the scanner's geometrical parameters was finally verified, leading to the arrangement of cameras around a human, which guarantees high accuracy of the reconstruction. Additionally, to quantify the results, the quality rates were used, taking into account not only the obtained measurement uncertainty of the scanner, but also the processing time and the resulting efficiency.

Evaluation of the trueness and precision of complete arch digital impressions on a human maxilla using seven different intraoral digital impression systems and a laboratory scanner.

OBJECTIVES: An impression accuracy study using a cadaver maxilla was performed using both prepared and intact teeth as well as palatal tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three crown preparations were performed on a cadaver maxilla. Seven different digital impression systems along with polyvinylsiloxane impressions were used to create digital models of the maxilla. Three-dimensional (3D) files of the experimental models were compared to a master model. The 3D files were overlaid and analyzed using a comparison software to create color coded figures that were measured for deviations between the master and experimental models. RESULTS: For scanning tooth structure, only the Planscan was significantly less accurate than the rest of impression techniques. No significant differences in accuracy were found between models created using digital impressions and those created from traditional vinyl polysiloxane impressions with cross arch deviations ranging from 18 to 39 µm for each. CONCLUSIONS: Impressions taken using all digital impression systems, save for the Planscan, were able to accurately replicate the tissues of a complete arch human maxilla. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Studies examining accuracy of digital impression systems have generally been performed on materials other than dental tissues. Optically, materials such as plastic and metal have properties different from enamel and dentin. This study evaluates accuracy of digital impression systems on human dentin, enamel, and soft tissues.

Effect of the Inter-Tooth Distance and Proximal Axial Wall Height of Prepared Teeth on the Scanning Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners.

This study aimed to analyze the effect of the height of the proximal axial wall of the prepared tooth and the distance between the adjacent tooth and the prepared tooth on the scan accuracy of intraoral scanners. Ten working casts with maxillary first molars prepared to receive zirconia crowns were randomly obtained from a dental clinic. Each of the 10 casts was scanned using two intraoral scanners (i700; MEDIT and CS3600; Carestream; computer-aided design [CAD] test model, CTM; N = 15 per working cast) 15 times per scanner. Individual dies of the prepared teeth were fabricated, and high-precision scan data were acquired using a laboratory scanner (CAD reference model, CRM; N = 1). CTMs were aligned relative to the prepared tooth of CRMs by using three-dimensional inspection software (Ver 2018.1.0; Control X; 3D Systems). Data were statistically analyzed using an independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance for between-group comparisons (α = 0.05). The inaccuracy in the proximal regions (mesial or distal) of the prepared tooth was higher than that in the buccal and lingual regions (p < 0.05). The scan accuracy was not correlated with the variables when the distance between the adjacent tooth and the prepared tooth was ≥2.0 mm and the height of the proximal axial wall of the prepared tooth was <3.0 mm (p > 0.05). Therefore, an excellent scan accuracy can be obtained using an intraoral scanner when the distance between the adjacent tooth and the prepared tooth is ≥2.0 mm and the proximal axial wall height of the prepared tooth is <3.0 mm.

Scanning Accuracy of 10 Intraoral Scanners for Single-crown and Three-unit Fixed Denture Preparations: An In Vitro Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of 10 intraoral scanners for single-crown and three-unit preparation models. METHODS: A maxillary partially edentulous model was fabricated. A dental cast scanner was used to obtain standard tessellation language (STL) data. Ten intraoral scanners, namely Trios 2 (TR2; 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark), True Definition (TD; 3M, Saint Paul, MN, USA), CEREC AC Omnicam (OM; Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA), Organical Scan Oral (OS; R+K, Berlin, Germany), PlanScan (PS; Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland), DWIOP (DW; Dental Wings, Montreal, Canada), Xianlin (XL; Hangzhou Xianlin, Hangzhou, China), DL-100 (DL; Guangzhou Longcheng, Guangzhou, China), Trios 3 (TR3; 3Shape) and i500 (MD; MEDIT, Seoul, South Korea) were used to obtain stereolithography data as test groups. Trueness, precision and surface accuracy were evaluated by deviation analysis using 3D image processing software. One tooth with a three-unit preparation for each test group was registered with the reference scan data, and the absolute distance from another tooth was calculated as the absolute accuracy. The data were analysed using a Mann-Whitney U test and Dunn-Bonferroni test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The best trueness, precision and surface accuracy of scanning single crown preparation were recorded with TD (trueness 2.9 µm and precision 1.9 µm) and XL (surface accuracy 20.3 ± 2.9 µm). The best trueness, precision, surface accuracy and absolute accuracy of three-unit preparations were recorded with TD (2.6 µm), XL (1.9 µm), OM (27.1 ± 5.2 µm) and TR3 (79.2 ± 19.6 µm), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in trueness between single- and multiple-unit preparations for any of the intraoral scanners (P > 0.05). A statistically significant difference in the surface accuracy between single and multiple preparations was found for TR2, TD, OM, DW, XL, DL and MD (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The trueness and precision of intraoral scanners for scanning three-unit preparations were nearly the same as those for single-crown preparations; however, with the exception of OS, PS and TR3, the surface accuracy of single-crown preparations was significantly better than that for three-unit preparations.

Torsion and linear accuracy in intraoral scans obtained with different scanning principles.

PURPOSE: Few investigations have examined the production of single restorations using intraoral scanners (IOS). Data on full-arch scans are rare, and data regarding torsion within the entire arch are very sparsely reported. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the deviations of torsion and linear distances in full-arch scans of three IOS based on different scanning principles. METHODS: A cobalt-chrome-molybdenum alloy master model (CCMM) with four hemispheres was fabricated by laser sintering. The CCMM was digitized using a laboratory scanner (ATOS-Core/GOM) and scanned with three IOS (Omnicam/Sirona(OC); True Definition/3M(TD); TriosII/Cara-Version/Kulzer(TR)). All scan data were exported in a standard STL-file format and were analyzed with GOM Inspect software (V7.5/GOM). Torsion between the right and left side of the arch and linear accuracy (trueness and precision) were evaluated. After normality was confirmed, all data were subjected to parametric statistical analyses. RESULTS: The torsion ranged from 0.07±0.03°(OC) to 0.29±0.14°(TD). Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences between the OC and TD scanners and between the TR and TD scanners. The linear distances ranged from 6±5µm(OC) to 298±317µm(TD). Significant differences were observed among all investigated IOS (p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although the highest torsion was observed for the TD scanner, it is still not clear whether the differences between the IOS are related to the scanning principle or to the scanning algorithm. Due to the high clinical relevance of full-arch restorations, future studies should consider torsion. Regarding linear accuracy, no general difference related to the scanning principles of the IOSs was observed.

Measurement of dental crown wear -In vitro study.

The purpose of the study was to test new method for in vitro evaluation of dental material wear with 3D digitization procedure. Thirty dental crowns, made of polyetheretherketone and veneered with composite material, were subjected to wear test. The crown surface was digitized using coordinate measuring machine before and after the performed wear test. Mesh 3D models were reconstructed and average and maximum depth of lost material and volume loss was calculated (GOM Inspect 2016 software). Mean average depth value amounted 12±7 µm, maximum depth value was 42 µm, while mean volume loss was 0.0024 mm3. The smallest measured values were 4 µm for depth value and 0.0003 mm3 for volume loss. Coefficient of variation was very high for all tested parameters (>50%) as a result of data inconsistency. Within the limitations of applied methodology, the possibility of using coordinate measuring machine in measurement of dental material wear was confirmed.

The influence of different digital impression technology on the accuracy of 3D printed models / 实用口腔医学杂志

Objective:To evaluate the accuracy of Cerec Bluecam and Cerec Omnicam with 3D printed resin models.Methods:A metal master model including 4 cylindrical metal preparations on the model base,respectively simulating the maxillary canine and the first molar preparations,was prepared.The right canine and the right first molar were respectively marked as A and B,and the left as C and D.The master model was scanned respectively by Cerec Bluecam and Cerec Omnicam for 10 times,10 digital models were genera-ted in Bluecam group and Omnnicam group respectively.Resin models were obtained by a 3D printer based on the digital models,the distance of AB,AC,BD and the diameter(d)of A were respectively measured.Statistical analysis was conducted by SPSS 13.0 soft-ware.Results:The distance of AB,AC,BD of master model and Bluecam group showed significant difference(P 0.05);the distance of AC,BD of master model and Omnicam group showed significant difference(P 0.05).All the distances of the Bluecam group and Omnicam group showed significant difference(P <0.05).Conclusion:The scanning accuracy of Cerec Bluecam is higher than that of Cerec Omnicam in a single preparation scanning.When the scanning area ex-tending,the scanning accuracy of Cerec Omnicam is higher than that of Cerec Bluecam.