Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: An in vitro descriptive comparison

BMC Oral Health

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Nedelcu, Robert ^a   Olsson, Pontus ^a   Nyström, Ingela ^a   Thor, Andreas ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

3D compare analysis; Accuracy; Digital impression; Finish line; Intraoral scanner

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL IMPRESSION; DENTAL PROCEDURE; FLUORESCENCE IMAGING; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; PROCEDURES; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TOOTH CROWN;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; CROWNS; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL MODELS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; IN VITRO TECHNIQUES; OPTICAL IMAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 85042422785     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0489-3     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Mormann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(Suppl):7S-13S.
2. Mormann WH, Bindl A. The Cerec 3--a quantum leap for computer-aided restorations: initial clinical results. Quintessence Int. 2000;31(10):699-712.
3. Fasbinder DJ. The CEREC system: 25 years of chairside CAD/CAM dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141(Suppl 2):3S-4S.
4. Zimmermann M, Mehl A, Mormann WH, Reich S. Intraoral scanning systems - a current overview. Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(2):101-29.
5. Ting-Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review. J Prosthodont. 2015;24(4):313-21.
6. Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: an in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(1):36-42.
7. Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):92.
8. Persson AS, Oden A, Andersson M, Sandborgh-Englund G. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness. Dent Mater. 2009;25(7):929-36.
9. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1461-71.
10. Mehl A, Ender A, Mormann W, Attin T. Accuracy testing of a new intraoral 3D camera. Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12(1):11-28.
11. Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):11-21.
12. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):121-8.
13. Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(1):9-17.
14. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(6):1687-94.
15. Nedelcu R, Olsson P, Nystrom I, Ryden J, Thor A. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method. J Dent. 2017;
16. Kuhr F, Schmidt A, Rehmann P, Wostmann B. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients. J Dent. 2016;55:68-74.
17. Raja V. FK: reverse engineering: an industrial perspective. London: Springer; 2008.
18. Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G, Logozzo S. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):149.
19. Park JM. Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8(5):354-62.
20. Guth JF, Runkel C, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Keul C. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(5):1445-55.
21. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results - Part 1: General principles and definitions (ISO 5725-1:1994) [ www.iso.org ].
22. Tsirogiannis P, Reissmann DR, Heydecke G. Evaluation of the marginal fit of single-unit, complete-coverage ceramic restorations fabricated after digital and conventional impressions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(3):328-35. e322
23. Ahlholm P, Sipila K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J Prosthodont. 2016;
24. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971;131(3):107-11.
25. Lee JJ, Jeong ID, Park JY, Jeon JH, Kim JH, Kim WC. Accuracy of single-abutment digital cast obtained using intraoral and cast scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(2):253-9.
26. Li H, Lyu P, Wang Y, Sun Y. Influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powder-free intraoral scanner: a laboratory study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(1):93-101.