Optical impressions assessment for overlay restorations with rubber dam: A clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The possibility of making impressions of teeth prepared with a rubber dam in place has been proposed; however, this requires trimming and rescanning the mesh, which has been described as a cause of accuracy loss. This study aims to clinically determine whether overlay restorations obtained from a scan with a rubber dam in place have equivalent marginal fit, contact points, and occlusal fit to the same type of restorations obtained from a scan without a rubber dam.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty patients who underwent overlay restoration of a molar with at least one neighbouring tooth were selected. After tooth preparation, two scans were performed: one without a rubber dam and the other with a rubber dam. Restorations were randomly created from one scan or another. The marginal fit, interproximal contact points, and occlusal fit were evaluated clinically. Two meshes, with and without rubber dams, were also compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in the clinical evaluation of the overlays made of the two meshes. The trueness of the mesh from the impression made with a rubber dam with respect to the mesh without a rubber dam was about 40 µm in the critical areas of the preparation (margins, intaglio, and interproximal contact points).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that under the conditions performed and with the equipment used, there are no significant clinical differences between overlay restorations made from a scan with a rubber dam and those made from a scan without a rubber dam.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Scanning with a rubber dam in place may be a valid option for certain types of restorations under certain clinical conditions.

Influence of implant angulation and clinical implant scan body height on the accuracy of complete arch intraoral digital scans

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The accuracy of digital implant scans can be affected by the implant angulation, implant depth, or interimplant distance. However, studies analyzing intraoral scanning accuracy with different implant angulations and different scan body heights are scarce.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the influence of the implant angulation and clinical implant scan body height on the accuracy of complete arch scans.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two definitive implant casts with 6 implant analogs (Zimmer Biomet) were obtained: 1 cast had all the implant analogs parallel (GP group), and 1 cast had the implant analogs with divergence of up to 30 degrees (GD group). A coordinate measurement machine (Global Evo 09.15.08) was used to measure the positions of the implant analogs. Each group was divided into 3 subgroups depending on the clinical implant scan body height: 10, 6, and 3 mm. An implant scan body (Elos Accurate Scan Body Brånemark system) was positioned on each implant analog. A total of 10 scans of each subgroup were recorded by using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3). Each STL file obtained was imported into a reverse engineering software program (Geomagic), and linear and angular Euclidean measurements were obtained. The Euclidean calculations between the implant analog positions of the definitive implant casts were used as a reference to calculate the discrepancies among the corresponding subgroups. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test revealed that the lineal measurements were not normally distributed, so the Kruskal-Wallis and pairwise comparison Dunn tests were used (α=.05). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test revealed that the angular measurements were normally distributed. Therefore, the 2-way ANOVA and pairwise comparison Tukey tests were used (α=.05).

RESULTS

The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant differences in the linear Euclidean medians between the GP and GD groups with different clinical implant scan body heights (H(5)=23.18, P<.001). Significant differences in the linear Euclidean medians were computed between the GP-6 and GD-10 subgroups (P=.009), GD-3 and GD-6 subgroups (P=.029), and GD-3 and GD-10 subgroups (P=.001). Two-way ANOVA revealed that the implant angulation (F(1, 3.3437)=28.93, P<.001) and clinical implant scan body height (F(2, 0.4358)=3.77, P=.029) were significant predictors of discrepancies in the angular measurement.

CONCLUSIONS

Implant angulation and clinical scan body height influenced scanning accuracy. The lowest clinical implant scan body height tested had the lowest accuracy in both parallel and angled implants, but statistically significant differences were found only in the angled group.

Considerations for predictable outcomes in static computer- aided implant surgery in the esthetic zone

OBJECTIVE

To provide technical and clinical recommendations for implementing a digital workflow in Static Computer-Aided Implant Surgery in the anterior maxilla.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS

An optimal 3D implant position is crucial for achieving satisfying results in implant rehabilitation in the esthetic area. Due to its complexity, implant placement in the esthetic zone should be executed with precision and predictability. Static Computer-Aided Implant Surgery requires thorough planning and detailed attention to every step of the digital workflow protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Implant positioning in the esthetic zone using Static Computer-Aided Implant Surgery is a technique-sensitive procedure that requires precise execution of each step. This approach ensures accurate prosthetically driven 3D implant placement and prevents potential errors that could lead to inaccurate positioning.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The proper implementation of Static Computer-Aided Implant Surgery may increase the level of agreement between the planned and definitive implant 3D positions in the esthetic zone, thus enhancing the esthetic outcomes of implant rehabilitation.

Trueness and precision of complete arch dentate digital models produced by intraoral and desktop scanners: An ex-vivo study

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to compare the trueness and precision of five intraoral scanners (Emerald S, iTero Element 5D, Medit i700, Primescan, and Trios 4) and two indirect digitization techniques for both teeth and soft tissues on fresh mandibular and maxillary cadaver jaws.

METHODS

The maxilla and mandible of a fully dentate cadaver were scanned by the ATOS industrial scanner to create a master model. Then, the specimens were scanned eight times by each intraoral scanner (IOS). In addition, 8 polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impressions were made and digitized with a Medit T710 desktop scanner. Stone models were then poured and again scanned with the desktop scanner. All IOS, PVS, and stone models were compared to the master model to calculate the mean absolute surface deviation for mandibular teeth, maxillary teeth, and palate.

RESULTS

For mandibular teeth, the PVS trueness was only significantly better than the Medit i700 (p < 0.001) and Primescan (p < 0.05). In maxillary teeth, the PVS trueness was significantly better than all IOSs (p < 0.05-0.001); the stone trueness was significantly better than Emerald S (p < 0.01), Medit i700 (p < 0.001) and Primescan (p < 0.01). In the palate, PVS and stone trueness were significantly lower than the iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01) and Trios 4 (p < p < 0.01). Stone trueness was significantly lower than the Medit i700 (p < 0.05). The precision in the palate was significantly lower for PVS and stone than for Emerald S (p < 0.01, p < 0.05), iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01, p < 0.01), Primescan (p < 0.001, p < 0.001), and Trios 4 (p < 0.001, p < 0.01). Significant differences in trueness between the IOSs were observed only in the mandibular teeth. The Medit i700 performed worse than Emerald S (p < 0.01) and iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01). For mandibular teeth, the Medit i700 was significantly more precise than Primescan (p < 0.01) and the Emerald S (p < 0.05). The Trios 4 was significantly less precise than Emerald S (p < 0.05). The precision of Medit i700 was significantly worse than iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01) for maxillary teeth, as well as the Primescan (p < 0.01) and Trios 4 (p < 0.05) for the palate.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, indirectly digitized models from PVS impressions had higher trueness than IOS for maxillary teeth; precision between the two methods was similar. IOS was more accurate for palatal tissues. The differences in trueness and precision for mandibular teeth between the various techniques were negligible.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

All investigated IOSs and indirect digitization could be used for complete arch scanning in mandibular and maxillary dentate arches. However, direct optical digitization is preferable for the palate due to the low accuracy of physical impression techniques for soft tissues.

Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner for Recording Completely Edentulous Arches-A Systematic Review

Scanning edentulous arches during complete denture fabrication is a crucial step; however, the quality of the resulting digital scan is still questionable. The purpose of this study is to systematically review studies (both clinical and in vitro) and determine whether intraoral scanners have clinically acceptable accuracy when recording completely edentulous arches for the fabrication of removable complete dentures. An electronic search in medical databases like PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WOS), using a combination of relevant keywords, retrieved 334 articles. After full-text evaluation, twelve articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review (eight clinical studies and four in vitro studies). A quality analysis of the included studies was carried out using the QUADAS-2 tool. The accuracy values varied between different intraoral scanners. Different regions of the edentulous arches showed differences in trueness and precision values in both in vitro and clinical studies. Peripheral borders, the inner seal, and poorly traceable structures like the soft palate showed maximum discrepancies. The accuracy of intraoral scanners in recording clear anatomic landmarks like hard tissues with attached mucosa was comparable to conventional edentulous arch impressions. However, higher discrepancies were recorded when digitizing mobile and poorly traceable structures. Intraoral scanners can be used to digitize denture-bearing areas, but the interpretation of the peripheral border and the soft palate should be carefully carried out.

The effect of generation change on the accuracy of full arch digital impressions

PURPOSE

This study is aimed to evaluate the effect of generation change on accuracy of IOSs on full-arch scans and the inter-operator reliability.

METHODS

In this study, 6 different IOS were tested: 3Shape Trios 3 (20.1.2.), 3Shape Trios 4 (20.1.1.), Medit i500 (2.3.6.), Medit i700 (2.4.6.), Planmeca Emerald (6.0.1.) and Planmeca Emerald S (6.0.1.). Eighteen dental students, inexperienced in scanning, took part in this study as operators. Each operator made 10 digital impressions; altogether, 30 impressions were made by each scanner. The 30 STL files were imported to the Geomagic Control X program, where they were compared to a reference STL file; the surface point's deviation of the full arch and the distance between the second molars' distobuccal cusps were measured, the inter-operator reliability was also investigated.

RESULTS

A significant increase in accuracy was found between Trios 3 and 4 in the case of both parameters and between Medit i500 and i700 in the case of full arch. There was no significant difference between Planmeca generations. In case of the inter-operator reliability no significant difference was detected.

CONCLUSION

Within this current study's limitation, it can be concluded that surface digitalization's accuracy can be modified with generation changes and that digital technology is less technique sensitive than traditional impression taking.

Accuracy of intraoral scanning versus conventional impressions for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defects

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digital dental impressions obtained by intraoral scanning (IOS) for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defects by comparing them with conventional impression techniques. Ten subjects underwent an experimental procedure where three ceramic blocks were affixed to the healthy palate mucosa. Digital dental impressions were captured using IOS and subsequently imported into software. Conventional impressions obtained by silicone rubber were also taken and scanned. Linear distance and best-fit algorithm measurements were performed using conventional impression techniques as the reference. Twenty impressions were analyzed, which included 30 pairs of linear distances and 10 best-fit algorithm measurements. Regarding linear distance, paired two-sample t-test demonstrated no significant differences between IOS and model scanning in groups A and C, whereas significant differences were found in group B (P < 0.05). Additionally, ANOVA revealed significant differences among the groups (P < 0.05). No significant differences were found for the best-fit algorithm measurement of the dentition. IOS can provide accurate impressions for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defects and its accuracy was found to be comparable with conventional impression techniques. A functional impression may be needed to ensure accurate reproduction of soft and hard tissues in defect or flap areas.

Evaluation of the accuracy of intraoral scanners for complete-arch scanning: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the complete-arch scanning accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOSs) to that of reference standard tessellation language (STL) files.

DATA

Studies comparing the trueness and precision of IOS STL files with those of reference STL scans for different arch types (dentate, edentulous, completely edentulous with implants, and partially edentulous with implants) were included in this study.

SOURCES

An electronic search of five databases restricted to the English Language was conducted in October 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

A total of 3,815 studies were identified, of which 114 were eligible for inclusion. After study selection and data extraction, pair-wise comparison and NMA were performed to define the accuracy of scanning for four arch subgroups using four outcomes (trueness and precision expressed as mean absolute deviation and root mean square values). Cochrane guidelines and the QUADAS-2 tool were used to assess the risk of bias. GRADE was used for certainty assessment.

RESULTS

Fifty-three articles were included in this NMA. Altogether, 26 IOSs were compared directly and indirectly in 10 network systems. The accuracy of IOSs scans were not significantly different from the reference scans for dentate arches (three IOSs), edentulous arches (three IOSs), and completely edentulous arches with implants (one IOS). The accuracy of the IOSs was significantly different from the reference scans for partially edentulous arches with implants. Significant accuracy differences were found between the IOSs, regardless of clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of complete-arch scanning by IOSs differs based on clinical scenarios.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Different IOSs should be used according to the complete arch type.

A fully digital workflow to register maxillomandibular relation using a jaw motion tracer for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation: A technical report

OBJECTIVE

This technique aimed to describe a fully digital workflow to register maxillomandibular relation for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Mandibular kinematics could be reproduced in a four-dimensional (4D) virtual patient based on the intraoral scan, facial scan, cone beam computed tomography, and jaw motion trajectory, which helped record centric relation and determine a proper occlusal vertical dimension in a virtual environment. The therapeutic position could be exported directly to the dental computer-aided design software for digital waxing design with a facial scan. The 4D virtual patient was also used to verify the functional and esthetic outcomes of provisional restorations.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel approach digitized the process of determination, delivery, and double-check of maxillomandibular relation, thus contributing to the establishment of a completely digital workflow for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Registration of maxillomandibular relation, including centric relation and occlusal vertical dimension is critical to the success of prosthetic rehabilitation. Traditional procedures are complex and time-consuming, and heavily rely on the clinical experience of dentists. A fully digital approach to creating a 4D virtual patient and registering the maxillomandibular relation is established, which guides to determine a proper occlusal vertical dimension in centric relation. Digital delivery and double-check can simplify the conventional procedure and ensure that the determined maxillomandibular relation is reliable.

Conventional cast vs. CAD/CAM post and core in a fully digital chairside workflow - An in vivo comparative study of accuracy of fit and feasibility of impression taking

OBJECTIVES

Clinical data for CAD/CAM post and cores (PC) is still scarce, even though developments in digital dentistry have improved dental treatment in many aspects. Therefore, the purpose of this in vivo study was to compare CAD/CAM PC fabricated in a fully digital chairside workflow to conventional cast PC (CPC) according to the accuracy of fit and the impression taking. The null hypothesis was that there is no significant difference between CAD/CAM PC and CPC.

METHODS

The study was conducted on 30 teeth in 25 patients receiving a CPC during their prosthetic treatment plan. On each tooth a conventional and a digital post impression were taken. Subsequently, one CPC following a conventional and one CAD/CAM PC following a digital workflow were fabricated. Both PC were tried-in intraorally and assessed according to a standardised evaluation sheet. The deviation between the two impression methods was evaluated by superimposing the datasets in a 3D analysis software. Statistical analysis for pairwise comparison was conducted according to Wilcoxon and median test with a significance level of p = 0.05.

RESULTS

CAD/CAM PC performed significantly better compared to CPC according to accuracy of fit (p = 0.022) and feasibility of impression taking (p < 0.001). The deviation between post impression methods increased from "coronal" to "apical". Between "coronal"/"middle" no significant difference (p = 0.158) was detected, whereas the pairwise comparison between the other measurement categories showed significant differences (p = 0.002, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The null hypothesis was rejected since CAD/CAM PC performed significantly better and the deviation between the post impression methods showed significant differences.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

By using intraoral scanners (IOS) teeth can be restored with customised CAD/CAM PC in a single session. Within the limitations of this study the fully digital chairside workflow led to superior accuracy of fit of PC and higher feasibility of impression taking than the conventional workflow for CPC.

Assessment of guide fitting using an intra-oral scanner: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the capacity of an intra-oral scanner (IOS) to assess the position of an endodontic guide in vitro.

METHODS

Fourteen extracted human teeth were placed into a maxillary model and scanned using computed tomography and a reference laboratory scanner. An ideal endodontic guide was then created and modified by adding defects of different thicknesses to simulate incorrect positions: 50 μm, 150 μm, 400 μm, and 1000 μm. For each thickness, guides were printed three times and each guide was scanned by three experimented operators using a Trios 4 IOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). The 36 scans were compared using a best-fit alignment to the master model without defect to define the accuracy of the method and the positioning error.

RESULTS

The IOS presented a mean trueness of 1.28 μm (SD= 12.70) and a mean precision of 11.52 μm (SD= 62.17). Considering all sizes of defect, the mean measured position of the endodontic guide was highly correlated (R>0.99) with the expected position. Compared to the ideal guide, there was a mean linear deviation of 46.11 μm (SD= 23.21) and a mean angular deviation of 5.9° (SD= 1.2); this deviation was not influenced by the operator.

CONCLUSION

The present study found that an IOS had good performance to detect a positioning error of the endodontic guide in vitro.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This new application of IOS has a promising potential in clinical practice to assist practitioners during the fitting of guides.

Reproducibility of the digital palate in forensic investigations, a two-year retrospective cohort study of twins

OBJECTIVES

The palatal scans of the same individuals were compared after two years to assess forensic reproducibility. The effect of orthodontic treatment, the comparison area and the digitization approach were investigated.

METHODS

The palate was scanned in 20 pairs of monozygotic twins by an intraoral scanner (IOS) three times to assess repeatability. They were rescanned two years later by two different IOSs. An elastic impression and a plaster model were also made and scanned by a laboratory scanner (indirect digitization). Mean absolute distance between scans was compared after best-fit alignment. Scans from the two sessions were compared to evaluate the combined effect of aging, orthodontic treatment and different digitization methods (forensic reproducibility). Additionally, the scans of different digitization methods from the second session were compared (technical reproducibility). The between-siblings difference was compared in the two sessions to evaluate the effect of aging on palatal morphology.

RESULTS

The anterior palatal area showed significantly better repeatability and forensic reproducibility than the whole palate (p<0.001), but orthodontic treatment had no effect. Indirect digitization produced lower forensic and technical reproducibility than IOSs. For IOSs, repeatability (22 µm) was significantly (p<0.001) better than either forensic (75-77 µm) or technical reproducibility (37 µm). No significant changes were observed from the first to the second session in the between-sibling comparison. The closest between-sibling value (239 µm) considerably exceeded the highest forensic reproducibility value (141 µm).

CONCLUSIONS

Reproducibility is acceptable between the different IOSs, even two years apart, but is poor between IOS and indirect digitization. The anterior palate is relatively stable in young adults.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Intraoral scanning of the anterior palatal area has superior reproducibility, regardless of the IOS brand. Therefore, the IOS method could be suitable for identifying humans through anterior palatal morphology. However, the digitization of elastic impressions or plaster models had low reproducibility, preventing their application for forensic purposes.

Intraoral Scans of Full Dental Arches: An In Vitro Measurement Study of the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOS), according to different scanning strategies and to the experience of the operator. Six IOS setups were used in this study. Ten scans of a complete epoxy-resin-made maxillary dental arch were performed with each IOS, using four different scanning techniques (manufacturer-suggested scanning strategy, cut-out rescan technique, simplified scanning technique, novel scanning technique). Scans were also performed by an expert operator in the field of digital dentistry. An operator with no experience in the field of intraoral scans performed 10 scans following each of the scanning strategy suggested by the manufacturer. The master model was scanned with an industrial high-resolution reference scanner to obtain a highly accurate digitized reference model. All the digital models were aligned with the reference model using a software aimed at comparing the STL files. A total of n = 300 scans were performed. Once the data were pooled, Medit i700 and Primescan obtained the best results in terms of both trueness and precision, showing no statistically significative differences (p > 0.05) to the first and the second scanning technique, Medit i700 scanner allowed to obtain the best values both in terms of trueness (24.4 ± 2.1 μm and 21.4 ± 12.9 μm, respectively) and precision compared to other IOS (23.0 ± 1.6 μm and 30.0 ± 18.0 μm, respectively). When considering the third scanning technique, Medit i700 recorded the best values in terms of trueness while Primescan recorded the best values in terms of precision (24.0 ± 2.7 μm and 26.8 ± 13.7 μm, respectively). When considering the two operators, significant differences between the two were found only with Medit i700 (p < 0.001). The examined IOS showed statistically significant differences in terms of trueness and precision. The used scanning strategy is a factor influencing the accuracy of IOS. Considering the expertise of the operators, clinically scanning strategies are not operative sensitive in terms of accuracy.

Accuracy of four recent intraoral scanners with respect to two different ceramic surfaces

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the complete arch accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOS) on two different ceramic surfaces.

METHODS

Two maxillary master cast samples were prepared. The bases of both the master casts were made from zirconium oxide. The difference between the two casts was that the teeth of the [ZR] cast were produced from zirconium oxide and that of the [LD] cast were made of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic. Unlike the zirconia teeth of the [ZR] cast, the lithium disilicate teeth of the [LD] cast were glazed. The two master casts were digitized using a high-resolution scanner (Atos Compact Scan 5 M, GOM GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) to obtain digital reference casts. Subsequently, each master cast was scanned 15 times using four IOSs. The IOSs were the Cerec Omnicam [OM], Primescan [PR], Trios 4 [TR4], and VivaScan [VS]. On surface comparison, the absolute mean deviation values were obtained for trueness and precision. For multiple comparisons, statistically significant differences were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the Kruskal-Wallis H test. The p-value was adjusted to control for the increased risk of type I error (p < 0.0083). To compare the two means, the t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were used (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Trueness values for [ZR] ranged from 24.6 (±6.3) µm for [PR] and 77.1 (±8.3) µm for [OM]. Trueness values for [LD] were between 28.3 (±6.3) µm for [PR] and 72.8 (±15.6) µm for [OM]. Precision values for [ZR] ranged from 17.6 (±3.7) µm for [PR] to 37.3 (±9.9) µm for [OM]. Precision values for [LD] ranged from 17.5 (±3.6) µm for [PR] to 41.8 (±8.7) µm for [OM]. Statistically significant differences were found among all the IOSs (p < 0.0083). The trueness values of the four IOSs did not differ significantly (p < 0.05) with respect to either the [ZR] or [LD] cast. The precision values of [OM] and [VS] differed significantly with respect to the scanned surface.

CONCLUSIONS

Complete arch scans achieved with the four IOSs showed significantly different trueness and precision results. [VS] and [OM] were more sensitive in terms of the scanned material.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The latest IOSs showed the required accuracy for complete arch digital impressions in-vitro investigations. These findings should be implemented under conditions relevant to complete arch deviations, such as the construction of occlusal splints, analysis of occlusal relationships, and long-span restorations. Clinicians should be aware that the clinically acceptable threshold varies depending on the purpose of the IOS.

In vitro comparison of five desktop scanners and an industrial scanner in the evaluation of an intraoral scanner accuracy

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to compare the precision of ATOS industrial, 3ShapeE4, MeditT710, CeramillMap400, CSNeo, PlanScanLab desktop, and Mediti700 intraoral scanners. The second aim was to compare the trueness of Mediti700 assessed by ATOS and desktop scanners.

METHODS

Four plastic dentate models with 7-12 abutments prepared for complete arch fixed dentures were scanned by all scanners three times. Scans were segmented to retain only the abutments. The precision and trueness were calculated by superimposing scans with the best-fit algorithm. The mean absolute distance was calculated between the scan surfaces. The precision was calculated based on the 12 repeats. Trueness was evaluated by superimposing the desktop and IOS scans to the industrial scans. IOS was also aligned with the two most accurate desktop scanners.

RESULTS

The precision of 3ShapeE4 and MeditT710 (3-4μm) was only slightly lower than that of ATOS (1.7μm, p<0.001) and significantly higher than CeramillMap400, CSNeo, and PlanScanLab (6-10 μm, p<0.001). The trueness was the highest for the 3Shape E4 (12-13 μm) and Medit T710 (13-16 μm) without significant difference. They were significantly better than CeramillMap400, CSNeo, and PlanScanLab (22-31μm, p<0.001). Accordingly, the Mediti700 trueness was evaluated by ATOS, 3ShapeE4, and MeditT710. The three trueness was not significantly different; ATOS (23-26 μm), 3Shape E4 (22-25 μm), and Medit T710 (20-23 μm).

CONCLUSIONS

All desktop scanners had the acceptable accuracy required for a complete arch-fixed prosthesis. The 3Shape E4 and the Medit T710 might be used as reference scanners for studying IOS accuracy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

3ShapeE4, MeditT710, CeramillMap400, CSNeo, PlanScanLab laboratory, and Mediti700 intraoral scanners can be used for the prosthetic workflow in a complete arch. 3ShapeE4 and the MeditT710 could be used to test the accuracy of various phases of a laboratory workflow, replacing the industrial scanners.

[Measuring methods of volumetric changes of soft tissues at dental implants site and tooth recessions site]

The article is a review of literature on various methods for measuring gingival thickness at implant site and tooth recession. The purpose of the study was to analyze existing methods for assessing volumetric changes in soft tissues based on literature data and give recommendations on the choice of methods. The authors analyzed available methods and identified limitations and recommendations for the use of different methods. The literature review is also helpful to identify promising methods for assessing changes in soft tissue volume, which may help authors of future studies with method selection.

Intraoral Scanners for In Vivo 3D Imaging of the Gingiva and the Alveolar Process

This study aimed to assess the reliability of two intraoral surface scanners for the representation of the alveolar process in vivo. Complete maxillary scans (CS 3600, Carestream and TRIOS 3, 3Shape) were repeatedly obtained from 13 fully dentate individuals. Scanner precision and agreement were tested using 3D surface superimpositions on the following reference areas: the buccal front teeth area, the entire dental arch, the entire alveolar process, or single teeth by applying an iterative closest point algorithm. Following each superimposition, the mean absolute distance (MAD) between predefined 3D model surfaces was calculated. Outcomes were analyzed through non-parametric statistics and the visualization of color-coded distance maps. When superimpositions were performed on the alveolar process, the median scanner precision was below 0.05 mm, with statistically significant but negligible differences between scanners. The agreement between the scanners was approximately 0.06 mm. When single-tooth superimpositions were used to assess the precision of adjacent alveolar soft-tissue surfaces, the median error was 0.028 mm, and there was higher agreement between the scanners. The in vivo reliability of the intraoral scanners in the alveolar surface area was high overall. Single-tooth superimpositions should be preferred for the optimal assessment of neighboring alveolar surface areas relative to the dentition.

Comparative evaluation of digitally fabricated complete dentures versus conventional complete dentures: A randomized, single-blinded, cross-over clinical trial

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Clinical trials comparing outcomes associated with digital complete dentures (CDs) fabricated from intraoral scan data with those of CDs fabricated by using the conventional workflow are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of and patient satisfaction associated with digitally versus conventionally fabricated CDs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eight participants requiring CDs were enrolled in this study. Two sets of CDs were fabricated for each participant. One set was fabricated by using a digital workflow, which involved digital scanning with an intraoral scanner, whereas the other set was made by using the conventional workflow. The participants were given 1 set of CDs for 1 month and another set for the next month. The order of placing CDs was randomly selected for each participant. The internal adaptation, masticatory force, and masticatory efficiency of the CDs in each group were evaluated for objective analysis. Additionally, a questionnaire was provided to the participants, and the responses were evaluated for subjective satisfaction analysis. All parameters were analyzed by using t tests (α=.05).

RESULTS

The internal adaptation did not statistically significantly differ between the conventional and digital CDs with regard to the maxillary arches (P=.406) and mandibular arches (P=.412). The average masticatory force (P=.051) and maximum masticatory force (P=.110) likewise did not statistically significantly differ between the 2 types of CDs. Masticatory efficiency, expressed via the mixing ability index, was statistically better for conventional CDs than the digital CDs (P=.009). No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 types of CDs in terms of overall patient satisfaction as assessed by using the study questionnaire (P=.172 for maxillary CD and P=.161 for mandibular CD). However, the conventional CDs were statistically significantly better than the digital CDs with regard to subjective satisfaction with pronunciation ability (P=.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The digital CDs were inferior to the conventional CDs in terms of masticatory efficiency and pronunciation. However, internal adaptation and overall patient satisfaction were comparable between conventional and digital CDs. This finding suggests that intraoral scanning and additively manufactured CDs may be suitable for edentulous patients, at least for interim use.

The Effect of Scanning Strategy on Intraoral Scanner's Accuracy

The purpose of the present study was to examine the impact of scanning strategy on trueness and precision of the impression acquired from an intraoral scanner. Fifteen complete-arch, mandibular, post-orthodontic treatment casts were scanned with a laboratory scanner (Identica SE 3D, Medit) as the gold standard, and with an intraoral scanner (i500 Medit) following three different paths of the scanning head over the arch (scanning strategies A, B, and C). The hand scans were performed twice by one examiner and repeated by a second examiner, resulting in 180 triangular mesh surfaces (digital casts). The meshes were superimposed on the gold standards using the Viewbox 4 software. The closest distances between the meshes were computed and trueness and precision were evaluated using a General Linear Model. An interaction was found among the examiner and strategy. The accuracy of complete-arch impressions was affected by the scanning strategy; the manufacturer’s recommended strategy (A) was statistically significantly better (p < 0.05) than B and C, which were similar. An average accuracy below 50 μm, which is clinically acceptable in most orthodontic procedures, was achieved with all the examined scanning strategies.

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.

Additively Manufactured Scan Bodies for Virtual Patient Integration: Different Designs, Manufacturing Procedures, and Clinical Protocols

Additively manufactured intraoral scan bodies can be used to guide the alignment of a patient's digital file information, including facial and intraoral digital scans both with and without a cone beam computed tomography scan, and to obtain a 3D virtual patient's representation. The present manuscript reviews the different intraoral scan body designs, procedures involved in additive manufacturing, clinical protocols for fabricating an additively manufactured scan body, performing a patient's digital data collection, and completing the alignment techniques.

Construction of a Removable Partial Denture (RPD): Comparison between the Analog Procedure and the Selective Laser Melting Procedure

A partial removable denture is a device that allows the patient to recover from a partial edentulism. This case report describes the realization of a chrome–cobalt partial removable denture by using two different realization methods: (1) analogic framework and (2) hybrid framework. This allowed us to compare the stability, retention as well as clasp quality of both the products and to highlight their respective advantages, disadvantages, and limitations.

Techniques to improve the accuracy of complete-arch implant intraoral digital scans: A systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The best method of optimizing the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral digital scans is still unclear. For instance, the location of the scan bodies can be significantly distorted with respect to their actual positions, which would lead to a nonpassive fit of the definitive prosthesis.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze available techniques for improving the accuracy of digital scans in implant-supported complete-arch fixed prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three databases (Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar) were searched, and the results obtained were supplemented by a hand search. Specific descriptors identified techniques whose objective were to increase the accuracy of digital scans in implant-supported complete-arch fixed prostheses. Titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers, and unclear results were discussed with a third independent reviewer. A qualitative analysis based on procedural parameters was used. The interexaminer agreements of both were assessed by the Cohen kappa statistic, and the Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias across the studies.

RESULTS

A total of 17 techniques matching the inclusion criteria were evaluated. Higher accuracy but also differences regarding the need for supplementary devices, number of intraoral scans, and time consumption of clinical and software program steps were observed compared with the conventional digital scanning protocol. The use of a splinting device was common to most of the studies. The outcome variables for the evaluation of the effectiveness of these protocols were heterogeneous.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of additional techniques during intraoral scanning can improve accuracy in implant-supported complete-arch fixed prostheses. However, higher complexity for those procedures should be expected.

Influence of rescanning mesh holes on the accuracy of an intraoral scanner: An in vivo study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether the cutting-off and rescanning procedures have an impact on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of the intraoral digital scan.

METHODS

A right quadrant digital scan (reference scan) of a participant was obtained using an intraoral scanner (IOS) (TRIOS 4; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark). The reference scan was duplicated 135 times and divided into 3 groups based on the number of rescanned mesh areas: 1 (G1 group), 2 (G2 group), and 3 (G3 group) mesh holes. Each group was subdivided into 3 subgroups depending on the mesh hole diameter: 2 mm- (G1-2, G2-2, and G3-2), 4 mm- (G1-4, G2-4, and G3-4), and 6 mm- (G1-6, G2-6, and G3-6) (n = 15). A software program (Geomagic; 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA) was used to assess the discrepancy between the reference and the experimental scans using the root mean square (RMS). Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc multiple comparison Dunn's tests were used to analyze the data (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Trueness ranged from 5 to 20 µm and precision ranged from 2 to 10 µm. For trueness assessment, Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant differences on the RMS error values among the groups tested (P<.05). The G3-6 group obtained the lowest trueness and lowest precision values, while the G1-2, G1-4, G2-2, G2-4, and G3-2 groups computed the highest trueness and precision values. When comparing groups with the same number of rescanned mesh holes but with different diameter, the higher the diameter of the rescanned mesh hole, the lower the trueness values computed; however, when comparing groups with the same diameter of the rescanned mesh hole but with differing number of rescanned mesh holes, no significant differences were found in the RMS values among the groups. For the precision evaluation, Levene's test showed a lack of equality of the variances, and therefore of the standard deviations. The F-test with Bonferroni correction identified significant differences between the SDs between group G3-6 and all the other groups. When comparing instead the interquartile range (IQRs) due to the non-normality of the data, groups G1 and G2 also showed lower IQR values or higher precision than groups G3.

CONCLUSIONS

Cutting-off and rescanning procedures decreased the accuracy of the IOS tested. The higher the number and diameter of the rescanned areas, the lower the accuracy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Cutting-off and rescanning procedures should be minimized in order to increase the accuracy of the IOS evaluated. The intended clinical use of the intraoral digital scan is a critical factor that might determine the scanning workflow procedures.

Soft tissue metric parameters, methods and aesthetic indices in implant dentistry: A critical review

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to provide an overview of soft tissue metric parameters, methods, and aesthetic indices in implant dentistry. The secondary objective was to describe reliability and validity of aesthetic indices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search in Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases up to October 2020 to identify studies on soft tissue metric parameters, methods, and aesthetic indices. Aesthetic indices were evaluated in terms of reliability and validity. Data extraction was performed by the same reviewers.

RESULTS

Five metric parameters (papilla height, linear changes in soft tissue level, color assessment, soft tissue thickness, and profilometric soft tissue changes) registered by means of several methods (intra-oral registrations, radiographic assessments, digital analyses, and ultrasonic assessments), and 15 aesthetic indices (Papilla Index (PI), ad hoc questions scored with Visual Analogue Scales, Pink Esthetic Score (PES), Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI), Implant Aesthetic Score (IAS), Rompen Index, Subjective Esthetic Score, White Esthetic Score, Copenhagen Index, Complex Esthetic Index, Californian Dental Association Index (CDAI), Peri-Implant, and Crown Index, Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score, Implant Restoration Esthetic Index (IREI), and Mucosal Scarring Index (MSI)) could be identified. With respect to metric parameters and methods, intra-oral registrations were least accurate whereas profilometric soft tissue changes on the basis of digital surface models were most accurate. Six aesthetic indices showed good inter-rater reliability (PI, PES, ICAI, CDAI, IREI, and MSI). Good validity could only be shown for two indices (PES and CEI). Given this and on the basis of ease of use and ease of interpretation, PES qualified best for clinical research on single implants. None of the indices fulfilled the quality criteria for clinical research on multiple implants.

CONCLUSION

Many soft tissue assessment methods with varying reliability and validity have been described and used, which hampers uniform reporting in implant dentistry. Clinical investigators are advised to measure linear and profilometric soft tissue changes using digital surface models, and to use a reliable and validated aesthetic index. Currently, PES qualifies best for aesthetic evaluation of single implants. An index is to be developed to assess the aesthetic outcome of rehabilitations on multiple implants.

Intraoral scanners: An American Dental Association Clinical Evaluators Panel survey

BACKGROUND

Dentists may choose to integrate intraoral scanners (IOSs) into their practices, but there are many different IOS technologies and system generations to choose from, posing a challenge for dentists who want to invest in them.

METHODS

A survey of IOS use rates, advantages, satisfaction, and training was developed and deployed through Qualtrics to the 968 members of the American Dental Association Clinical Evaluators (ACE) Panel on February 19, 2021. Nonrespondents were sent reminders, and data were analyzed in SAS Version 9.4 (SAS).

RESULTS

A total of 369 panelists responded to the survey. IOS use was split among the ACE Panel; 53% indicated they use one in their practice. The top reason respondents began using IOSs was to improve clinical efficiency (70%). Ninety percent of respondents use IOSs for single tooth-supported crowns, and 58% began using IOSs less than 4 years ago. Most users are at least mostly satisfied (91%) with the results. Among nonusers, the top reason for not using an IOS was the high level of financial investment (66%); 34% and 40% of nonusers are thinking of buying or training with IOSs in 2021, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of IOSs is split; most users are satisfied with their results, and nonusers cited financial barriers as the most common reason for not investing in one.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

As IOSs continue to penetrate the market and dentists are faced with a decision whether to invest in one, they will need guidance on how to choose the most appropriate device for their patients.

Influence of rescanning mesh holes and stitching procedures on the complete-arch scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner: An in vitro study

PURPOSE

To measure the impact of different scanning patches on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner (IOS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A typodont was digitized using an industrial optical scanner (GOM Atos Q 3D 12 M) to obtain a reference mesh. The typodont was scanned using an IOS (TRIOS 3). Three groups were generated based on the rescan areas created: no mesh holes (G0 group), 3 mesh holes distributed on the digital scan (G1 group), and 3 mesh holes located on the left quadrant of the digital scan (G2 group). In the G0 group, a digital scan was completed following the manufacturer's scanning protocol. In the G1 group, a digital scan was obtained following the same protocol as G0 group. Three 12-mm diameter holes were created in the occlusal surfaces of the left second first molar, incisal edges of the central incisors, and right first molar of the digital scan using the IOS software. In the G2 group, a digital scan was obtained following the same protocol as G0 group. Three 12-mm diameter holes in the digital scan were created in the occlusal surface of the left first molar and left second and first premolars using the IOS software program. The discrepancy between the control and the experimental digital scans was measured using the root mean square calculation. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test demonstrated that data were normally distributed. One-way ANOVA followed by post hoc multiple comparison Bonferroni test were used to analyze the data (α = .05).

RESULTS

Trueness values ranged from 15 to 26 μm and the precision ranged from 21 to 150 μm. Significant differences in trueness mean values were found among the groups tested (F(2, 42) = 6.622, P = .003); the Bonferroni test indicated significant mean differences between the G0 and G2 groups (mean difference=0.11, SE=0.003, and P = .002). For precision evaluation, significant precision differences were found between the groups tested (F(2, 39)=9.479, P < .001); the Bonferroni test revealed significant precision differences between G0 and G2 groups (mean difference=-0.12, SE=0.030, and P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Rescanning mesh holes and stitching procedures decreased the trueness and precision of the IOS tested; furthermore, the number and dimensions of mesh holes rescanned represented an important factor that influenced the scanning accuracy of IOS tested.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

It is a fundamental procedure obtaining intraoral digital scans without leaving mesh holes, so the rescanning techniques are minimized and, therefore, the scanning accuracy of the intraoral scanner tested is maximized.

Accuracy of intraoral scans: An in vivo study of different scanning devices

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The accuracy of intraoral scanners is a prerequisite for the fabrication of dental restorations in computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) dentistry. While the precision of intraoral scanners has been investigated in vitro, clinical data on the accuracy of intraoral scanning (IOS) are limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical study was to determine the accuracy of intraoral scanning with different devices compared with extraoral scanning.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An experimental appliance was fabricated for 11 participants and then scanned intraorally and extraorally with 3 different intraoral scanners and a reference scanner. Intraoral and extraoral scans were subdivided into complete-arch and short-span scans and compared with the reference scan to assess trueness. Repeated scans in each group were assessed for precision.

RESULTS

Precision and trueness were higher for extraoral scans compared with intraoral scans, except for complete-arch scans with 1 intraoral scanner. The median precision of short-span scans was higher (extraoral: 22 to 29 μm, intraoral: 23 to 43 μm) compared with complete-arch scans (extraoral: 81 to 165 μm, intraoral: 80 to 198 μm). The median trueness of short-span scans (extraoral: 28 to 40 μm, intraoral: 38 to 47 μm) was higher than that of complete-arch scans (extraoral: 118 to 581 μm, intraoral: 147 to 433 μm) for intraoral and extraoral scanning.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoral conditions negatively influenced the accuracy of the scanning devices, which was also reduced for the complete-arch scans.

Comparison of the acquisition accuracy and digitizing noise of 9 intraoral and extraoral scanners: An objective method

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The quality of the digital cast obtained from an intraoral scanner is an important comparison parameter for computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) restorations. However, data on cast quality are typically provided by manufacturers, and objective evaluation of these devices is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to build an evaluation protocol of 8 intraoral scanners by using an objective method for a small-scale model equivalent in size to a 4-tooth wide cast. In addition, a laboratory scanner was included to compare the performance of intraoral and extraoral devices.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An 8-mm-thick zirconia gauge block was scanned 10 times with a laboratory scanner (Iscan D104) and 8 intraoral scanners (Omnicam, Primescan, Itero element 5D, CS 3600, TRIOS 3, Emerald, Planscan, and Medit i500). The obtained digital casts were extracted as standard tessellation language (STL) files and analyzed to evaluate the digitizing noise, dimensional trueness, and dimensional precision of each scanner. After validation of the normal distribution of the digitizing noise, dimensional trueness, and precision test results for each scanner with the Shapiro-Wilk test (α=.05), differences were determined with a 1-way ANOVA test.

RESULTS

Statistical differences were found between scanners (P<.05). The digitizing noise ranged from 3.2 ±0.6 μm with the Primescan to 15.5 ±2.5 μm with the Planscan. The dimensional trueness ranged from 19.1 ±11.5 μm for the CS3600 to 243.8 ±33.6 μm for the Planscan. The dimensional precision ranged from 7.7 ±2.4 μm for the Primescan to 53.7 ±3.4 μm for the Emerald. The group Iscan D104, Primescan, Itero 5D, CS3600, and TRIOS 3 showed minimally significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences were found among the intraoral scanners for small-scale scans. The objective methodology of using a gauge block provided coherent and repeatable results.

Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners for Recording the Denture Bearing Areas: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review clinical and laboratory studies that investigated the accuracy of intraoral scanners in recording denture bearing areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic and manual searches were conducted to identify all the available clinical and laboratory studies reporting the accuracy of digital impressions for recording denture related soft tissues. After the application of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final list of articles was reviewed to meet the objective of this study.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 18 studies out of which 8 were clinical and the rest were laboratory investigations. The eligible studies assessed the accuracy of intraoral scanners in recording both the denture supporting structures and the peripheral mobile tissues. The accuracy results were different among the various intraoral scanners. Likewise, the effect of several influencing factors, such as artificial markers, scanner head size, scanning strategy, and the operator's experience, were evaluated.

CONCLUSION

While the accuracy of intraoral scanners was comparable to the conventional techniques in recording bony structures with attached mucosa, they were not capable of accurately registering the mobile tissues. In addition, factors such as presence of a marker, larger scanner head size and specific scanning techniques appeared to improve the accuracy of the digital impression.

Evaluating the Effect of Ambient and Scanning Lights on the Trueness of the Intraoral Scanner

PURPOSE

To determine the influence of different scanning and ambient light conditions on the trueness values of an intraoral scanning (IOS) device.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The present study was conducted among 20 complete dentate volunteers. After making complete maxillary arch impressions with vinyl polysiloxane material, type IV dental stone was poured, and working casts were obtained. Then, the models were digitized using a dental laboratory scanner (LS) and standard tessellation language (STL) files were acquired. Full arch digital scans of the volunteers were also performed using an IOS device with 2 ambient light conditions (RL: room light, 1003 lux, and ZL: zero light, 0 lux) and 2 scanning light modes (blue [B] and white [W]). Twenty digital scans per group at each light condition were consecutively obtained. Discrepancy between the digital scans and digitized working casts was analyzed using a 3D inspection software. The obtained data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Significant differences were obtained among different light conditions for the IOS device (p ˂ 0.0001, F = 42.958 for positive deviations and F = 29.278, for negative deviations). The room light and blue mode (RLB) condition had the lowest deviation values compared with the other light conditions, followed by room light and white mode (RLW), zero light and blue mode (ZLB), and zero light and white mode (ZLW; p =  0.008, p ˂ 0.0001, and p ˂ 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Lighting conditions are effective in assessing the trueness of the digital impressions made with an IOS device. RLB conditions are recommended for taking a digital impression.

The Modern and Digital Transformation of Oral Health Care: A Mini Review

Dentistry is a part of the field of medicine which is advocated in this digital revolution. The increasing trend in dentistry digitalization has led to the advancement in computer-derived data processing and manufacturing. This progress has been exponentially supported by the Internet of medical things (IoMT), big data and analytical algorithm, internet and communication technologies (ICT) including digital social media, augmented and virtual reality (AR and VR), and artificial intelligence (AI). The interplay between these sophisticated digital aspects has dramatically changed the healthcare and biomedical sectors, especially for dentistry. This myriad of applications of technologies will not only be able to streamline oral health care, facilitate workflow, increase oral health at a fraction of the current conventional cost, relieve dentist and dental auxiliary staff from routine and laborious tasks, but also ignite participatory in personalized oral health care. This narrative article review highlights recent dentistry digitalization encompassing technological advancement, limitations, challenges, and conceptual theoretical modern approaches in oral health prevention and care, particularly in ensuring the quality, efficiency, and strategic dental care in the modern era of dentistry.

Volumetric changes at implant sites: A systematic appraisal of traditional methods and optical scanning-based digital technologies

AIM

To evaluate techniques for assessing soft tissue alterations at implant sites and compare the traditionally utilized methods to the newer three-dimensional technologies emerging in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed to identify interventional studies reporting on volumetric changes at implant sites following different treatments.

RESULTS

Seventy-five articles were included the following: 30 used transgingival piercing alone, one utilized calliper, six with ultrasonography, six on cone-beam computed tomography, and 32 utilized optical scanning and digital technologies. Optical scanning-based digital technologies were the only approach that provided 'volumetric changes,' reported as volumetric variation in mm³ , or the mean distance between the surfaces/mean thickness of the reconstructed volume. High variability in the digital analysis and definition of the region of interest was observed. All the other methods reported volume variation as linear dimensional changes at different apico-coronal levels. No studies compared volumetric changes with different approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the emergence of optical scanning-based digital technologies for evaluating volumetric changes, a high degree of variation exists in the executed workflow, which renders the comparison of study results not feasible. Establishment of universal guidelines could allow for volumetric comparisons among different studies and treatments.

Application of intraoral scanner to identify monozygotic twins

BACKGROUND

DNA base identification is a proper and high specificity method. However, identification could be challenged in a situation where there is no database or the DNA sequence is almost identical, as in the case of monozygotic (MZ) twins. The aim of this study was to introduce a novel forensic method for distinguishing between almost identical MZ twins by means of an intraoral scanner using the 3D digital pattern of the human palate.

METHODS

The palatal area of 64 MZ twins and 33 same-sex dizygotic (DZ) twins (DZSS) and seven opposite-sex dizygotic twins (DZOS) were scanned three times with an intraoral scanner. From the scanned data, an STL file was created and exported into the GOM Inspect® inspection software. All scans within a twin pair were superimposed on each other. The average deviation between scans of the same subject (intra-subject deviation, ISD) and between scans of the two siblings within a twin pair (intra-twin deviation, ITD) was measured. One-sided tolerance interval covering 99% of the population with 99% confidence was calculated for the ISD (upper limit) and the ITD (lower limit).

RESULTS

The mean ISD of the palatal scan was 35.3 μm ± 0.78 μm. The calculated upper tolerance limit was 95 μm. The mean ITD of MZ twins (406 μm ± 15 μm) was significantly (p < 0.001) higher than the ISD, and it was significantly lower than the ITD of DZSS twins (594 μm ± 53 μm, p < 0.01) and the ITD of DZOS twins (853 μm ± 202 μm, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The reproducibility of palatal intraoral scans proved to be excellent. The morphology of the palate shows differences between members of MZ twins despite their almost identical DNA, indicating that this method could be useful in forensic odontology.

Comparative analysis of trueness between conventional and digital impression in dental-supported fixed dental prosthesis with vertical preparation

Biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT) is a vertical preparation technique without a finish line to create a new anatomic crown with a prosthetic emergence profile. This case report describe the protocol realized digitally in a patient who required a new fixed partial denture (FPD) in the anterior esthetic zone. After time of temporary restoration, definitive conventional (CI) (double-cord retraction and vinyl polysiloxane material), and digital impression (DI) with three different intraoral scanner (IOS) (Trios®, True Definition® and iTero®) were taken. All digital impression were obtained through three different scans: temporary restoration in the mouth after healing period, prepared teeth, and temporary restoration out of the mouth. To establish which of the IOS was the most accurate, it was necessary to compare the STL files obtained from each of the IOS with the STL file of the conventional impression, which was digitized with a laboratory scanner (3Shape D800). All these STL were imported to a software (ExoCAD 2.4 Plovdiv®), and they were superimposed. To establish the difference in trueness with SC, 6 points were chosen, 3 points in teeth, and another 3 points in soft tissue. The mean measurement in terms of trueness in teeth were: STS (0,039 mm), SI (0,054 mm), STD (0,067 mm); and in soft tissue were: STS (0,051 mm), SI (0,09 mm), STD [0,236 mm]. The IOSs showed differences between them in terms of trueness, being the Trios the most accuracy IOS. Final restoration was fabricated and cemented. The patient was examined at 3, 6 and 12 months, without any type of biological or mechanical complications. Digital impression with an IOS seems to be a viable alternative to perform zirconia FPD in the BOPT tecbique.

Key words:Intraoral scanners, accuracy, vertical preparation, precision, CAD-CAM, prosthodontics.

Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial

Due to the high prevalence of periodontitis, dentists have to face a larger group of patients with periodontally compromised dentitions (PCDs) characterized by pathologic tooth migration and malocclusion. Impression taking in these patients is challenging due to several undercuts and extensive interdental areas (IAs). The aim of this clinical trial was to analyze the ability of analog and digital impression techniques to display the IAs in PCDs. The upper and the lower jaws of 30 patients (n = 60, age: 48-87 years) were investigated with one conventional impression (CVI) using polyvinyl siloxane and four digital impressions with intraoral scanners (IOSs), namely True Definition (TRU), Primescan (PRI), CS 3600 (CAR), and TRIOS 3 (TIO). The gypsum models of the CVIs were digitalized using a laboratory scanner. Subsequently, the percentage of the displayed IAs in relation to the absolute IAs was calculated for the five impression techniques in a three-dimensional measuring software. Significant differences were observed among the impression techniques (except between PRI and CAR, p-value < 0.05). TRU displayed the highest percentage of IAs, followed by PRI, CAR, TIO, and CVI. The results indicated that the IOSs are superior to CVI regarding the ability to display the IAs in PCDs.

Diagnosing tooth wear, a new taxonomy based on the revised version of the Tooth Wear Evaluation System (TWES 2.0)

Background

Tooth wear is a multifactorial condition, leading to the loss of dental hard tissues. Physiological tooth wear is a slow process that normally does not lead to any subjective symptoms. When the condition progresses, it can become pathological, and several signs and symptoms may occur. The Tooth Wear Evaluation System (TWES) was described to implement a systematic diagnostic and management approach. Recently, management guidelines were presented in a European Consensus Statement (ECS) as well.

Objectives

To evaluate the TWES in practice and to integrate the principles described in the ECS in order to compose a renewed TWES 2.0 and a new taxonomy.

Methods

The TWES and the recommendations of the ECS were used by dental clinicians, in order to test its applicability in practice.

Results

Agreement was reached that the TWES 2.0 will use a stepwise approach, with a straightforward Tooth Wear Screening part and a more detailed Tooth Wear Status part. Also, the assessment of pathology from the ECS is incorporated in the TWES 2.0 (both classification and taxonomy).

Conclusions

In the TWES 2.0 is described that tooth wear is pathological if moderate/severe/extreme tooth wear is present, in combination with one or several described signs and symptoms. Aetiology can be assessed by findings that indicate a chemical and/or a mechanical cause. The taxonomy may help to identify situations in which preventive (restorative) interventions in early stages of tooth wear can be indicated. The reliability and validity of the adapted parts must be proven.

Comparing the trueness of seven intraoral scanners and a physical impression on dentate human maxilla by a novel method

Backgrounds

Intraoral scanner (IOS) accuracy is commonly evaluated using full-arch surface comparison, which fails to take into consideration the starting position of the scanning (scan origin). Previously a novel method was developed, which takes into account the scan origin and calculates the deviation of predefined identical points between references and test models. This method may reveal the error caused by stitching individual images during intraoral scan. This study aimed to validate the novel method by comparing the trueness of seven IOSs (Element 1, Element 2, Emerald, Omnicam, Planscan, Trios 3, CS 3600) to a physical impression digitized by laboratory scanner which lacks linear stitching problems.

Methods

Digital test models of a dentate human cadaver maxilla were made by IOSs and by laboratory scanner after polyvinylsiloxane impression. All scans started on the occlusal surface of the tooth #15 (universal notation, scan origin) and finished at tooth #2. The reference model and test models were superimposed at the scan origin in GOM Inspect software. Deviations were measured between identical points on three different axes, and the complex 3D deviation was calculated. The effect of scanners, tooth, and axis was statistically analyzed by the generalized linear mixed model.

Results

The deviation gradually increased as the distance from scan origin increased for the IOSs but not for the physical impression. The highest deviation occurred mostly at the apico-coronal axis for the IOSs. The mean deviation of the physical impression (53 ± 2 μm) was not significantly different from the Trios 3 (156 ± 8 μm) and CS 3600 (365 ± 29 μm), but it was significantly lower than the values of Element 1 (531 ± 26 μm), Element 2 (246 ± 11 μm), Emerald (317 ± 13 μm), Omnicam (174 ± 11 μm), Planscan (903 ± 49 μm).

Conclusions

The physical impression was superior compared to the IOSs on dentate full-arch of human cadaver. The novel method could reveal the stitching error of IOSs, which may partly be caused by the difficulties in depth measurement.

New Intraoral Scanner-Based Chairside Measurement Method to Investigate the Internal Fit of Crowns: A Clinical Trial

To measure the internal fit of the computer-aided designed/computer-aided manufactured (CAD/CAM) crowns, a new scanner-based chairside approach was investigated in patients, and the results were compared to the established silicone replica technique and a digital laboratory replica method. Thirty full-coverage crown preparations were included. Based on a digital impression with an intraoral scanner (IOS, Trios 3), three CAD/CAM measurement copings (‘COM’, resin composite; ‘ZIR’, zirconium dioxide; ‘NPA’, non-precious alloy) were fabricated for each tooth preparation. The internal fit of the measurement copings was analyzed with three different evaluation methods: IOS-based digital approach (D-IOS), digital replica method with laboratory software (D-GOM), and conventional silicone replica technique (CV-SR). The congruence between the determined target parameter of the 80-µm cement space and the actual measured internal gap was investigated. Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA (p-value < 0.05). No significant difference was determined between the three evaluation methods. However, significant differences were observed for the three coping materials (p-value < 0.05), the single measurement position (marginal, axial, and occlusal fit) (p-value < 0.05), and the interaction between the coping material and the measurement position (p-value < 0.05). COM revealed the smallest internal gap, followed by ZIR and NPA. Regardless of the coping material, the occlusal gap was higher than the axial and marginal gaps. Furthermore, only the internal gaps of the marginal area almost matched the target parameter of 80-µm for the cement space. D-IOS is effective for measuring internal fit of single crowns in different clinical settings.

A comparison of accuracy of 3 intraoral scanners: A single-blinded in vitro study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Measuring both the trueness and precision of an intraoral scanner (IOS) will provide a thorough understanding of its accuracy.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the complete-arch trueness and precision of 3 commercially available intraoral scanners equipped with the latest software version and compare them by using a laboratory scanner as reference.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nineteen maxillary and 19 mandibular completely dentate stone casts previously acquired from 19 patients by using a polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) dual mix impression and stock trays were scanned with 3 intraoral scanners (TRIOS 3; 3Shape A/S, i500; Medit, and Emerald; Planmeca) using their latest software versions. The same casts were also scanned with a laboratory scanner (E3; 3Shape A/S) that served as the reference scanner. Files were exported in standard tessellation language (STL) format and inserted into a metrology 3D mesh comparison software program (CloudCompare).

RESULTS

In terms of trueness, a significant difference was found among the scanners (F (2.37)=239.7, P<.001). Planmeca Emerald had significantly lower trueness values than either the Medit i500 (P<.001) or the 3Shape A/S TRIOS 3 (P<.001). No significant difference in trueness was found between the Medit i500 and the 3Shape A/S TRIOS 3 scanner (P=.365). In terms of precision, a significant difference was found among the scanners (F (2.89)=301.2, P<.001). The 3Shape A/S TRIOS 3 scanner was significantly more precise than the other scanners (P<.001 for both the Medit i500 and Planmeca Emerald). The Planmeca scanner was significantly more precise than the Medit i500 scanner (P<.001). Concerning the ability of the scanners to reproduce the files of the reference scanner without overestimation or underestimation, the Medit i500 produced files that significantly underestimated the reference scanner's files (t (37)=-12.4, P<.001). The other scanners did not significantly either underestimate or overestimate the files of the standard (t (37)=-1.91, P=.062 for the TRIOS 3 and t (37)=1.64, P=.101 for the Planmeca) CONCLUSIONS: With regard to completely dentate arch trueness, the Planmeca Emerald IOS had statistically lower trueness. With regard to complete dentate arch precision, the 3Shape A/S TRIOS 3 IOS was the statistically more precise scanner. With regard to reference scanner file estimation, the Medit i500 IOS produced files that significantly underestimated the reference scanner files. All 3 tested scanners exhibited a completely dentate arch average accuracy below 100 μm in vitro.

Digital dentistry: The new state of the art - Is it disruptive or destructive?

OBJECTIVE

Summarizing the new state of the art of digital dentistry, opens exploration of the type and extent of innovations and technological advances that have impacted - and improved - dentistry. The objective is to describe advances and innovations, the breadth of their impact, disruptions and advantages they produce, and opportunities created for material scientists.

METHODS

On-line data bases, web searches, and discussions with industry experts, clinicians, and dental researchers informed the content. Emphasis for inclusion was on most recent publications along with innovations presented at trade shows, in press releases, and discovered through discussions leading to web searches for new products.

RESULTS

Digital dentistry has caused disruption on many fronts, bringing new techniques, systems, and interactions that have improved dentistry. Innovation has spurred opportunities for material scientists' future research.

SIGNIFICANCE

With disruptions intrinsic in digital dentistry's new state of the art, patient experience has improved. More restoration options are available delivering longer lifetimes, and better esthetics. Fresh approaches are bringing greater efficiency and accuracy, capitalizing on the interest, capabilities, and skills of those involved. New ways for effective and efficient inter-professional and clinician-patient interactions have evolved. Data can be more efficiently mined for forensic and epidemiological uses. Students have fresh ways of learning. New, often unexpected, partnerships have formed bringing further disruption - and novel advantages. Yes, digital dentistry has been disruptive, but the abundance of positive outcomes argues strongly that it has not been destructive.