In Vitro Trueness and Precision of Intraoral Scanners in a Four-Implant Complete-Arch Model.

(1) Background: New intraoral (IOS) and laboratory scanners appear in the market and their trueness and precision have not been compared. (2) Methods: Seven IOS and two laboratory scanners were used to scan a mandibular edentulous model with four parallel internal hexagon implant analogues and PEEK scan bodies. Digital models in Standard Tessellation Language (STL) were created. The master model with the scan bodies was scanned (×10) with a computerized numerical control 3D Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM). The short (distances of adjacent scan posts) and long distances (distances of the scan posts with non-adjacent sites in the arch) among the centroids of the four analogues were calculated using CMM special software. Trueness (comparisons with the master model) and precision (intragroup comparisons) were statistically compared with ANOVA, chi-square and Tukey tests. (3) Results: Laboratory scanners had the best trueness and precision compared to all IOSs for long distances. Only iTero (Align Technologies Inc., Milpitas, CA, USA) had comparable trueness with one laboratory scanner in short and long distances. For short distances, CS3600 (Carestream Health, Inc., Rochester, NY, USA), Omnicam, Primescan (Sirona Dental Sys-tems GmbH, Bens-heim, Germany) and TRIOS 4 (3Shape A/S, Copen-hagen, Denmark) had similar trueness to one laboratory scanner. From those, only Omnicam and Primescan had similar precision as the same laboratory scanner. Most IOSs seem to work better for smaller distances and are less precise in cross-arch distances. (4) Conclusions: The laboratory scanners showed significantly higher trueness and precision than all IOSs tested for the long-distance group; for the short distance, some IOSs were not different in trueness and precision than the laboratory scanners.

Accuracy of 3 different impression techniques for internal connection angulated implants.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Making implant impressions with different angulations requires a more precise and time-consuming impression technique. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of nonsplinted, splinted, and snap-fit impression techniques of internal connection implants with different angulations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An experimental device was used to allow a clinical simulation of impression making by means of open and closed tray techniques. Three different impression techniques (nonsplinted, acrylic-resin splinted, and indirect snap-fit) for 6 internal-connected implants at different angulations (0, 15, 25 degrees) were examined using polyether. Impression accuracy was evaluated by measuring the differences in 3-dimensional (3D) position deviations between the implant body/impression coping before the impression procedure and the coping/laboratory analog positioned within the impression, using a coordinate measuring machine. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. Means were compared with the least significant difference criterion at P<.05. RESULTS: Results showed that at 25 degrees of implant angulation, the highest accuracy was obtained with the splinted technique (mean ±SE: 0.39 ±0.05 mm) and the lowest with the snap-fit technique (0.85 ±0.09 mm); at 15 degrees of angulation, there were no significant differences among splinted (0.22 ±0.04 mm) and nonsplinted technique (0.15 ±0.02 mm) and the lowest accuracy obtained with the snap-fit technique (0.95 ±0.15 mm); and no significant differences were found between nonsplinted and splinted technique at 0 degrees of implant placement. CONCLUSIONS: Splinted impression technique exhibited a higher accuracy than the other techniques studied when increased implant angulations at 25 degrees were involved.

The effect of impression technique and implant angulation on the impression accuracy of external- and internal-connection implants.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of impression technique and implant angulation on the impression accuracy of external- and internal-connection implants using a novel experimental device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental device was designed and fabricated to make in vitro impressions by means of open- and closed-tray techniques. Impressions of eight implants with two different connections (four external-hex and four internal-hex) at three angulations (0, 15, and 25 degrees) were made using a medium-consistency polyether material. Evaluation of implant impression accuracy was carried out by directly measuring the difference in coordinate values between the implant body/impression coping positioned on the base and the impression coping/laboratory analog positioned in the impression using a touch-probe coordinate measuring machine. Experimental data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance. The significance level of all hypothesis testing procedures was set at P<.05. RESULTS: The results showed that: (1) for implants with external connections, impression accuracy is not significantly affected by the impression technique, implant angulation, or their interaction; and (2) for implants with internal connections, impression accuracy is significantly affected only by implant angulation: Impression inaccuracy was greater at the 25-degree implant angulation. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the open- and closed-tray techniques had no effect on the accuracy of multiple implant impressions. The interaction between impression technique and implant angulation was also not significant. However, implant angulation significantly affected the impression accuracy when implants with internal connections were used.