Accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the trueness and precision of complete arch implant impressions using conventional impression, intraoral scanning with and without splinting, and stereophotogrammetry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An edentulous model with six implants was used in this study. Four implant impression techniques were compared: the conventional impression (CI), intraoral scanning (IOS) without splinting, intraoral scanning with splinting (MIOS), and stereophotogrammetry (SPG). An industrial blue light scanner was used to generate the baseline scan from the model. The CI was captured with a laboratory scanner. The reference best-fit method was then applied in the computer-aided design (CAD) software to compute the three-dimensional, angular, and linear discrepancies among the four impression techniques. The root mean square (RMS) 3D discrepancies in trueness and precision between the four impression groups were analyzed with a Kruskal-Wallis test. Trueness and precision between single analogs were assessed using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Significant differences in the overall trueness (p = .017) and precision (p < .001) were observed across four impression groups. The SPG group exhibited significantly smaller RMS 3D deviations than the CI, IOS, and MIOS groups (p < .05), with no significant difference detected among the latter three groups (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Stereophotogrammetry showed superior trueness and precision, meeting misfit thresholds for implant-supported complete arch prostheses. Intraoral scanning, while accurate like conventional impressions, exhibited cross-arch angular and linear deviations. Adding a splint to the scan body did not improve intraoral scanning accuracy.

Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: This in-vitro study assessed the influence of two intraoral scanning (IOS) protocols on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of digital scans performed in edentulous arches. METHODS: Twenty-two abutment-level master casts of edentulous arches with at least four implants were scanned repeatedly five times, each with two different scanning protocols. Protocol A (IOS-A) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch before inserting the implant scan bodies, followed by their insertion and its subsequent digital acquisition. Protocol B (IOS-B) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch with the scan bodies inserted from the outset. A reference scan from each edentulous cast was obtained using a laboratory scanner. Trueness and precision were calculated using the spatial fit analysis, cross-arch distance, and virtual Sheffield test. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Statistical significance was set at α = .05. RESULTS: In the spatial fit test, the precision of average 3D distances was 45 µm (±23 µm) with protocol IOS-A and 25 µm (±10 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and the trueness of average 3D distances was 44 µm (±24 µm) with protocol IOS-A and 24 µm (±7 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001). Cross-arch distance precision was 59 µm (±53 µm) for IOS-A and 41 µm (±43 µm) for IOS-B (p = .0035), and trueness was 64 µm (±47 µm) for IOS-A and 50 µm (±40 µm) for IOS-B (p = .0021). Virtual Sheffield precision was 286 µm (±198 µm) for IOS-A and 146 µm (±92 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and trueness was 228 µm (±171 µm) for IOS-A and 139 µm (±92 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The IOS-B protocol demonstrated significantly superior accuracy. Placement of scan bodies before scanning the edentulous arch is recommended to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning.

Virtual implant scan body switch by using computer-aided design programs avoiding the need of obtaining a new intraoral implant digital scan: A novel protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The present manuscript describes a technique to virtually switch an implant scan body eliminating the need of obtaining a new intraoral implant digital scan. CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Implant scan bodies assist on transferring the 3-dimensional position of the implants into the virtual definitive implant cast. However, if a different implant part is desired during the designing procedures of the implant restoration such as selecting a different implant abutment of varying height, angulation, or manufacturer, a new intraoral implant digital scan with the specific implant scan body is required. CONCLUSIONS: This novel protocol aims to reduce possible complications that require capturing a new intraoral implant digital scan, facilitate prostheses design modifications after the obtention of the definitive intraoral implant digital scan, and to ease the manufacturing procedures. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The novel technique may provide a solution for virtually switch implant scan bodies for fabricating implant-supported single crowns or short-span prostheses. Additional studies are needed before its clinical implementation.

Adaptation and Biomechanical Performance of Custom-Fit Mouthguards Produced Using Conventional and Digital Workflows: A Comparative In Vitro Strain Analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The use of different models for the fabrication of custom-fit mouthguards (MTGs) can affect their final thickness, adaptation, and shock-absorption properties. This study aimed to evaluate the adaptation, thickness, and shock absorption of ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) thermoplastic MTGs produced using conventional plaster or three-dimensional (3D) printed models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A typical model with simulated soft gum tissue was used as the reference model to produce MTGs with the following two different protocols: plast-MTG using a conventional impression and plaster model (n = 10) and 3DPr-MTG using a digital scanning and 3D printed model (n = 10). A custom-fit MTG was fabricated using EVA sheets (Bioart) plasticized over different models. The MTG thickness (mm), internal adaptation (mm) to the typodontic model, and voids in the area (mm2) between the two EVA layers were measured using cone-beam computed tomography images and Mimics software (Materialize). The shock absorption of the MTG was measured using a strain-gauge test with a pendulum impact at 30° with a steel ball over the typodont model with and without MTGs. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance with repeated measurements, followed by Tukey's post hoc tests. RESULTS: The 3DPr-MTG showed better adaptation than that of the Plast-MTG at the incisal/occlusal and lingual tooth surfaces (p < 0.001). The 3DPr-MTG showed a thickness similar to that of the Plast-MTG, irrespective of the measured location. MTGs produced using both model types significantly reduced the strain values during horizontal impact (3DPr-MTG 86.2% and Plast-MTG 87.0%) compared with the control group without MTG (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The MTGs showed the required standards regarding thickness, adaptation, and biomechanical performance, suggesting that the number and volume of voids had no significant impact on their functionality. Three-dimensional printed models are a viable alternative for MTG production, providing better adaptation than the Plast-MTG at the incisal/occlusal and lingual tooth surfaces and similar performance as the MTG produced with the conventional protocol.

Influence of limited mouth opening in children on intraoral scanning accuracy: An in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: Although intraoral scanning is highly reliable, little is known about its accuracy in young children with limited mouth-opening ability. AIM: To determine the accuracy of intraoral scans based on the degree of mouth opening. DESIGN: To simulate mouth opening in children with primary dentition, three groups (n = 5 per group) were allocated by maximum mouth opening of 30, 37 and 40 mm. After the primary dentition model was connected to a dental phantom, intraoral scanning was performed using iTero and TRIOS4. The scanned files were digitally evaluated. Root mean square values were calculated to assess trueness and precision. RESULTS: iTero showed deviations of three-dimensional trueness of 0.067 ± 0.008, 0.063 ± 0.001 and 0.065 ± 0.005 mm, and TRIOS4 of 0.07 ± 0.002, 0.064 ± 0.003 and 0.066 ± 0.002 mm in the 30, 37 and 40 mm groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in either mouth opening (p > .017) or the intraoral scanners (p > .05). The same statistical results were obtained for precision, with the exception of the 30 mm of mouth opening. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, limited mouth opening hardly influenced the accuracy of intraoral scanning.

Effect of scanning strategies on trueness and time efficiency of digital impression on paediatric models.

BACKGROUND: Various scanning methods aim to reduce intraoral scanner errors, yet no specific approach targets paediatric patients. AIM: Evaluate continuous (C) and noncontinuous (NC) scanning patterns' impact on the trueness and duration of paediatric digital impressions. DESIGN: A standard pedodontic typodont model was scanned with a Trios 4 Move+ IOS using four scanning strategies. C1 and C2 followed continuous scanning from the right molars, with different directions. NC1 scanned noncontinuously from the right molar, with breaks every four teeth. NC2 began at the right primary incisor, with breaks after every three teeth. Each scan, performed five times by one researcher, was timed. Industrial scanning provided reference data. Deviations were analyzed using the MIXED procedure. RESULTS: NC1 had higher deviations in the lower jaw, whereas C1 and NC1 showed higher deviations in the upper jaw (p < .001). C1 had significantly higher deviations in the upper jaw than the lower jaw (p = .041). NC2 had the longest scanning time in both upper and lower jaws (p = .002). CONCLUSION: Paediatric digital impressions benefit from starting at the anterior and incorporating breaks, although this increases scanning time.

Auxiliary occlusal devices for IO scanning in a complete digital workflow of implant-supported crowns: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the crown accuracy and time efficiency of a complete digital workflow, utilizing an auxiliary occlusal device and IO scanning, with a conventional workflow, for multiple implant-supported single crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 patients with two adjacent posterior implants were included. 12 patients were randomly assigned to digital workflow group, involving intra-oral scanning with an auxiliary occlusal device and manufacture of customized abutments and zirconia single crowns (test group). The other 12 were assigned to the conventional workflow (control group), involving conventional impression and CAD-CAM crowns based on stone casts. Crown scanning was done before and after clinical adjustment using an intraoral scanner. Two 3D digital models were overlapped to assess dimension changes. Chair-side and laboratory times for the entire workflow were recorded and a linear mixed model and Independent-sample t tests were used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: The maximum occlusal deviation was 279.67 ± 112.17 µm and 479.59 ± 203.63 µm in the test and control group, respectively (p < 0.001). The sizes of the occlusion adjustment areas were 12.12 ± 10.51 mm2 and 25.12 ± 14.14 mm2 in the test and control groups, respectively (p = 0.013). The mean laboratory time was 46.08 ± 5.45 and 105.92 ± 6.10 min in the test and control groups, respectively (p < 0.001).The proximal contact adjustment and mean chair-side time showed no statistically significant difference between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A digital workflow for two implants-supported single crowns using an auxiliary device required fewer occlusal crown adjustments, and less laboratory time compared to conventional workflow. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of auxiliary occlusal devices in IOS enhances the accuracy of virtual maxillomandibular relationship in extended edentulous spans. Consequently, employing a digital workflow for multiple implants-supported crowns using IO scanning and an auxiliary occlusal device proves to be a feasible, accurate and efficient approach.

Accuracy of implant abutment level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws: an in vitro pilot study.

BACKGROUND: In edentulous jaws, factors such as the number of implants, cross-arch distribution, and the angle among implants may affect the accuracy of the implant impression. This study explored factors influencing the accuracy of implant abutment-level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws. METHODS: Two standard all-on-4 and all-on-6 models of edentulous jaws were constructed in vitro. In the stereophotogrammetry group (PG), the implant digital impression was made using stereophotogrammetry and saved as an STL file. In the conventional group (CNV), the impression was made using the open-tray splint impression technique. An electronic and optical 3D measuring instrument was used to scan the standard model and the conventional plaster model to obtain STL files. Using 3D data processing software (GOM Inspect Pro, Zeiss), the distance and angle between the abutments in the CNV impression and the PG impression were measured and compared with the data from the standard model. RESULTS: The distance deviation in the PG and the CNV was 145 ± 196 µm and 96 ± 150 µm, respectively, with a significant difference (P < 0.001). The angle deviation in the PG and the CNV was 0.82 ± 0.88° and 0.74 ± 0.62°, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.267). In the PG, the distance deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.145, P = 0.028) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.205, P = 0.002). The angle deviation was negatively correlated with the distance between implants (r = -0.198, P = 0.003) and positively correlated with the angle of implants (r = 0.172, P = 0.009). In the CNV, the effect of inter-implant distance on impression accuracy was also shown by Spearman correlation analysis: r = 0.347 (P < 0.001) for distance deviation and r = -0.012 (P = 0.859) for angle deviation. The effect of inter-implant angulation on impression accuracy deviation was r = -0.026 (P = 0.698) for distance deviation and r = 0.056 (P = 0.399) for angle deviation. CONCLUSIONS: The CNV method is closer to the real value of the original model. The distance between implants and the distribution angle had a weak correlation with the accuracy of digital impressions but no significant correlation with the accuracy of traditional impressions.

Influence of augmented reality technique on the accuracy of autotransplanted teeth in surgically created sockets.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of an augmented reality drilling approach and a freehand drilling technique for the autotransplantation of single-rooted teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty samples were assigned to the following surgical techniques for drilling guidance of the artificial sockets: A. augmented reality technique (AR) (n = 20) and B. conventional free-hand technique (FT) (n = 20). Then, two models with 10 teeth each were submitted to a preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan and a digital impression by a 3D intraoral scan. Afterwards, the autotrasplanted teeth were planned in a 3D dental implant planning software and transferred to the augmented reality device. Then, a postoperative CBCT scan was performed. Data sets from postoperative CBCT scans were aligned to the planning in the 3D implant planning software to analize the coronal, apical and angular deviations. Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney non-parametric statistical analysis were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were shown at coronal (p = 0.123) and angular (p = 0.340) level; however, apical deviations between AR and FT study groups (p = 0.008) were statistically significant different. CONCLUSION: The augmented reality appliance provides higher accuracy in the positioning of single-root autotransplanted teeth compared to the conventional free-hand technique.

Impact of scanning strategies on the accuracy of virtual interocclusal records in partially edentulous arch using intraoral scanner: an in vitro study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the scanning strategies affecting the accuracy of virtual interocclusal records (VIR) in partially edentulous arches using an intraoral scanner in vitro. METHODS: A reference model of a partially edentulous arch with implant analogs in positions 45,46 and 47 was constructed. Six pairs of 1-mm diameter metal beads were placed on the gingival tissue as markers for measurement. Four scanning strategies were tested: Quadrant-arch Scan (group 1), Quadrant-arch Scan with Auxiliary occlusal devices (AOD) (group 2), Full-arch Scan (group 3), Full-arch Scan with AOD (group 4). The model was digitalized with a lab scanner as a reference and 15 scans were obtained for each group. The accuracy of VIR was assessed by comparing the experiment data to the reference digital model. RESULTS: The mean surface deviations of VIR for Groups 1-4 were 89.4 ± 105.2 µm,95.6 ± 132.8 µm,152.3 ± 159.7 µm and 107.6 ± 138.2 µm respectively. Quadrant-arch scans resulted in lower errors of VIR than full-arch scan (P < 0.001). There was a significant interaction between the AOD and scanning span (P = 0.017). The Quadrant-arch scan with AOD　(group 2) produced the least error in the distally extended edentulous area. CONCLUSIONS: Quadrant-arch scans showed better accuracy of VIR than full-arch scans across all tooth positions. The combination of AOD and quadrant-arch scan further enhances VIR accuracy in distally extended edentulous areas.

Intraoral optical impression versus conventional impression for fully edentulous maxilla: an in vivo comparative study.

AIM: The aim of the present in vivo study was to compare the clinical trueness of primary mucostatic impressions obtained either by a classical alginate or an optical intraoral scanner technique in patients with a fully edentulous maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 30 patients with a fully edentulous maxilla were included in the study and underwent both conventional impressions and intraoral optical impressions (Trios 3). The conventional impressions were casted and the resulting plaster casts were digitized using a desktop scanner (Imetric D104i). These digitized impressions were superimposed over the optical impressions to compare the differences between the two data sets. Statistical analyses were performed to identify relevant deviations. RESULTS: For the 30 intraoral impressions, 80.88% of the surface areas were below the tolerance threshold of 25 µm and were thus considered similar to the areas scanned with the desktop scanner from the reference plaster cast. Interestingly, the differences (19.12% of the surface areas) were localized in depressible areas such as the vestibule, soft palate, incisive papilla, and flabby ridges. These locations were consistent with the mean of positive differences of +22.8 µm, indicating deformation or less compression with the use of the intraoral scanner. CONCLUSIONS: The digital primary impression of the fully edentulous maxilla can be considered similar to the conventional alginate impression except in the depressible areas. Considering the mucostatic objective of such a primary impression, one may consider the optical impression to be more accurate than the conventional one.

Influence of the scanning path on the accuracy of intraoral scanners in the implanted edentulous patient: an in vitro study.

AIM: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of scan paths on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intra-oral scanning of an implant impression on an edentulous patient. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An epoxy resin maxillary model was made with 6 bone level implants (NobelParallel Conical Connection RP, NobelBiocare®). The implants were placed at the spot of the first incisor, the canine and the first molar. The trans gingival component (Multi-unit, NobelBiocare®) was screwed onto the implants. The scanbodies (IO 2C-A, Elos Accurate®) were then screwed onto the multi-units. The model was run through a coordinate measurement machine to obtain a control cast. Then, five different scanning paths, respectively the zigzag technique (ZZT), the zigzag technique with palatal (ZZTP), the wrap technique (WT), the wrap technique with palatal (WTP), and the big zigzag technique (BZZT), were applied by a single operator. Finally, each scan was compared to the control model. Results were assessed by one-way ANOVA and linear mixed effects models at P<0.05. RESULTS: The study showed that scan paths ZZT and ZZTP had significantly lower absolute positioning errors and residual mean square errors than the others (P<0.0001). For distances between consecutive implant axes and for absolute vertical errors, their superiority was borderline (P<0.10). Overall, techniques ZZT and ZZTP were equally performant and proved to be the most accurate. CONCLUSIONS: This in vitro experimental study demonstrates that the scan path can have an influence on the accuracy of the optical impression for full arch rehabilitation on implants.

Effect of finish line location and saliva contamination on the accuracy of crown finish line scanning.

PURPOSE: Intraoral scanners are used widely as an alternative to conventional impressions, but studies on the influence of finish line location and saliva contamination on scanning trueness are lacking. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of finish line location and saliva contamination on the scanning trueness of crown finish lines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three ivorine teeth were prepared for all-ceramic crowns with finish lines placed equigingivally, 0.5 mm subgingivally, and 1.0 mm subgingivally. A single-cord technique was used for gingival retraction, and a total of 180 intraoral scans were made using two intraoral scanners (Emerald; Planmeca USA Inc., Hoffman Estates, IL, USA & Trios 3; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark). The prepared teeth were separated from the dentoform and scanned using the same intraoral scanners to create reference scans. All scans were imported to the design software (Dental System 2019; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark). After marking the finish lines of prepared teeth, intraoral scans were aligned to the reference scans for comparisons. Vertical and horizontal marginal discrepancies were measured at four different measuring points (buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal) and analyzed. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The average vertical and horizontal discrepancies from various groups ranged from -33 to 440 µm. For both intraoral scanners, subgingival finish line groups showed greater vertical and horizontal discrepancies compared with equigingival finish line groups. Saliva contamination significantly increased both vertical and horizontal discrepancies for all finish line locations. The discrepancy increases due to saliva contamination were greater for the subgingival groups. CONCLUSIONS: Subgingival finish lines were not accurately captured using the intraoral scanners. The presence of saliva significantly reduced scanning trueness, and this was amplified when the finish lines were located subgingivally.

Crown adjustment and chairside efficiency of single-unit restorations fabricated from immediate and staged impressions using a digital workflow for posterior implants.

PURPOSE: This is a clinical study to compare immediate and staged impression methods in a complete digital workflow for single-unit implants in the posterior area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients requiring single-unit implant crowns were enrolled. Forty patients were assigned to the test group, immediate digital impression after implant surgery with crown delivery 4 months later. The remaining 20 patients were assigned to the control group, staged digital impressions 4 months after implant surgery, and crown delivery 1 month later. Both workflows involved free-model CAD-CAM crown fabrications. The crowns were scanned before and after clinical adjustment using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS Color; 3Shape). Two 3D digital models were trimmed and superimposed to evaluate the dimensional changes using Geomagic Control software. Chairside times for the entire workflow were recorded. Kruskal-Wallis was performed to compare crown adjustments between two groups, while One-way ANOVA was used to compare chairside time durations between the test and control groups. RESULTS: All crowns were delivered without refabrication. The average maximum occlusion adjustment of crowns was -353.2 ± 207.1 µm in the test group and -212.7 ± 150.5 µm in the control group (p = 0.02). The average area of occlusal adjustment, measured as an area of deviation larger than 100 µm, was 14.8 ± 15.3 and 8.4 ± 8.1 mm2 in the test and control groups, respectively (p = 0.056). There were no significant differences in the mesial and distal contact adjustment amounts, or the maximum deviations of the proximal area, between the two groups. The mean chair-side time was 50.25 ± 13.48 and 51.20 ± 5.34 min in the test and control groups, respectively (p = 0.763). CONCLUSIONS: The immediate impression method in the digital workflow for single-unit implants required more occlusal adjustments of crowns but showed similar chairside times compared to the staged impression method.

In vitro evaluation of the impact of intraoral scanner, scanning aids, and the scanned arch on the scan accuracy of edentulous arches.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of complete maxillary and mandibular edentulous arch scans obtained using two different intraoral scanners (IOSs), with and without scanning aids, and to compare these results to those obtained using conventional impression methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two IOSs were used (TRIOS 4 [TRI] and Emerald S [EMR]) to scan maxillary and mandibular typodonts. The typodonts were scanned without scanning aids [TRI_WSA and EMR_WSA groups] (n = 10). The typodonts were then scanned under four scanning aid conditions (n = 10): composite markers [TRI_MRK and EMR_MRK groups], scanning spray [TRI_SPR and EMR_SPR groups], pressure indicating paste [TRI_PIP and EMR_PIP groups], and liquid-type scanning aid [TRI_LQD and EMR_LQD groups]. Conventional impressions of both arches were also made using irreversible hydrocolloids in stock trays [IHC] and using polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression material in custom trays (n = 10) which were digitized using a laboratory scanner. Using a metrology software program, all scans were compared to a reference scan in order to assess trueness and to each other to assess precision. Trueness and precision were expressed as the root mean square (RMS) of the absolute deviation values and the statistical analysis was modeled on a logarithmic scale using fixed-effects models to meet model assumptions (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The main effect of arch (p = 0.004), scanner (p < 0.001), scanning aid (p = 0.041), and the interaction between scanner and scanning aid (p = 0.027) had a significant effect on mean RMS values of trueness. The arch (p = 0.015) and scanner (p < 0.001) had a significant effect on the mean RMS values of precision. The maxillary arch had better accuracy compared to the mandible. The TRIOS 4 scanner had better accuracy than both the Emerald S scanner and conventional impressions. The Emerald S had better precision than conventional impressions. The scanning spray and liquid-type scanning aids produced the best trueness with the TRIOS 4 scanner, while the liquid-type scanning aid and composite markers produced the best trueness for the Emerald S scanner. CONCLUSION: The scanned arch and the type of scanner had a significant effect on the accuracy of digital scans of completely edentulous arches. The scanning aid had a significant effect on the trueness of digital scans of completely edentulous arches which varied depending on the scanner used.

Maxillary interim obturator prosthesis fabrication for a patient with limited mouth opening with a digital approach: A clinical report.

Squamous cell carcinoma is a common malignant condition affecting the oral cavity and may involve the surrounding maxillofacial regions. Treatment commonly involves resection of the tumor, followed by prosthetic rehabilitation of the resection defect. This clinical report presents a 62-year-old Asian male patient who had previously undergone surgical resection, resulting in a post-surgical Aramany Class II maxillary defect. The patient's medical history included severe trismus, characterized by restricted mouth opening, as well as a diagnosis of maxillary sinus verrucous squamous cell carcinoma. This report provides a comprehensive account of the rapid fabrication of an interim obturator using digitally assisted dentistry techniques.

Comparison of Direct Intraoral Scan and Traditional Impression for CAD/CAM Mandibular Overdenture Base: RCT on Peri-implant Marginal Bone Changes.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of digital vs traditional impression techniques on peri-implant vertical bone resorption in the creation of mandibular overdenture bases supported by four implants using CAD/CAM technology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty edentulous patients were placed in four mandibular implants and randomly divided into groups: (A) the control group (CIG) (n = 10); patients obtained CAD/CAM denture base using conventional impression technique and group (B) the study (DIG) group (n = 10); patients obtained CAD/CAM denture base using digital impression technique. Peri-implant vertical bone height was measured immediately (T0), 6 (T6), and 12 (T12) months after insertion. Peri-implant vertical bone loss (VBL) was calculated first 6 months (T1), the second 6 months (T2), and 1 year (T3) after insertion. RESULTS: For both groups, the survival rates of inserted implants were 100%. The amount of VBL in the first year in both groups was within normal ranges. In both groups, VBL significantly decreased over time. The control group recorded significantly higher VBL than (DIG) group at T2 (p = 0.006) and at T3 (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Digital intraoral scanning technique may be considered a more beneficial registration method than traditional impression technique for the construction of CAD/CAM 4-implant-assisted overdenture base regarding the preservation of vertical bone levels. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both digital intraoral scanners and conventional impression techniques can be used for the construction of CAD/CAM-implant-assisted overdenture bases regarding the preservation of peri-implant vertical bone resorption. How to cite this article: Seifeldeen AR, Aboelez MA, Gebreel AA, et al. Comparison of Direct Intraoral Scan and Traditional Impression for CAD/CAM Mandibular Overdenture Base: RCT on Peri-implant Marginal Bone Changes. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(6):527-534.

Research progress on accuracy of intraoral digital impressions for implant-supported full-arch prostheses. / æ— ç‰™é¢Œç§æ¤ä¿®å¤å£å† æ•°å­—åŒ–å°æ¨¡å‡†ç¡®æ€§ç ”ç©¶è¿›å±•.

With the rapid development of implant techniques and digital technology, digital impressions have become a commonly used impression method in implant restoration. At present, the accuracy of intraoral digital impressions directly applied to implant-supported full-arch prostheses remains inadequate, which is due to the high accuracy requirement of full-arch implant impressions, while there are still technical challenges in intraoral digital impressions about recognition and stitching. In this regard, scholars have proposed a variety of scanning strategies to improve the accuracy of intraoral scan, including mucosal modifications, auxiliary devices and novel scan bodies. At the same time photogrammetry, as a new digital impression technique, has been developing steadily and exhibits promising accuracy. This article reviews the research progress on the accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impressions and techniques which can improve the accuracy of intraoral digital impressions, to provide reference for clinical application.

THE ACCURACY OF INTRAORAL SCAN IN OBTAINING DIGITAL IMPRESSIONS OF EDENTULOUS ARCHES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.

OBJECTIVES: Accuracy is a crucial factor when assessing the quality of digital impressions. This systematic review aims to assess the accuracy of intraoral scan (IOS) in obtaining digital impressions of edentulous jaws. METHODS: This systematic review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022382983). A thorough retrieval of 7 electronic databases was undertaken, encompassing MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Virtual Health Library, and Open gray, through September 11, 2023. A snowball search was performed by tracing the reference lists of the included studies. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) question of this systematic review was: "What is the accuracy of intraoral scan in obtaining digital impressions of edentulous arches?" The Modified Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) was employed to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: Among the studies retrieved from databases and manual search, a total of 25 studies were selected for inclusion in this systematic review, including 9 in vivo and 16 in vitro studies. Twenty-one of the included studies utilized the 3D deviation analysis method, while 4 studies employed the linear or angular deviation analysis method. The accuracy results of in vitro studies indicated a trueness range of 20-600 µm and a precision range of 2-700 µm. Results of in vivo studies indicated a trueness range of 40-1380 µm, while the precision results were not reported. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, direct digital impressions by IOS cannot replace the conventional impressions of completely edentulous arches in vivo. Edentulous digital impressions by IOS demonstrated poor accuracy in peripheral areas with mobile tissues, such as the soft palate, vestibular sulcus, and sublingual area.

Accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impression with intraoral optical scanning and stereophotogrammetry: An in vivo prospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess accuracy of intraoral optical scanning (IOS) and stereophotogrammetry (SPG), complete-arch digital implant impressions in vivo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients needing implant-supported screw-retained zirconia complete-arch fixed-dental prostheses (ISZ-FDP) were recruited. For each patient, three impressions were taken: IOS, SPG (tests), and open-tray plaster (reference). Linear (ΔX, ΔY, and ΔZ), three-dimensional (ΔEUC), and angular deviations (ΔANGLE) were evaluated and stratified according to scanning technology for each implant. Potential effects of impression device (IOS and SPG), arch (maxilla and mandible), and implant number (4 and 6) were evaluated through multivariable analysis. Significance level was set at .05. RESULTS: A total of 11 complete arches (5 maxillae, 6 mandibles) in 11 patients were rehabilitated with ISZ-FDPs supported by 4 (n = 8) and 6 implants (n = 3). A total of 50 implants and 100 implant positions were captured by two investigated devices and compared to respective reference (mean ΔEUC IOS 137.2, SPG 87.6 µm; mean ΔANGLE 0.79, 0.38°). Differences between measurements (SPG-IOS) were computed for each implant, with negative values indicating better SPG accuracy. Significant mean ΔEUC difference of -49.60 µm (p = .0143; SD 138.15) and mean ΔANGLE difference of -0.40° (p < .0001; SD 0.65) were observed in favor of SPG. Multivariable analysis showed significant effect on ΔEUC (p = .0162) and ΔANGLE (p = .0001) only for impression devices, with SPG performing better. CONCLUSIONS: SPG experienced significantly higher linear and angular accuracy. No effect of type of arch or implant number was detected. Higher extreme deviations were experienced for IOS. SPG can be feasible for complete-arch digital impressions with caution, and rigid prototype try-in is recommended before screw-retained prosthesis manufacturing.