Rafla, K., Sherif, R., Ghanem, L. (2024). Accuracy of Two Digital Scanners (Intraoral, Extraoral) Compared to Conventional Impression Using Implant with Different Angulations (Zero, 15°,25°) “In-Vitro Study”. Journal of Fundamental and Clinical Research, 4(2), 172-188. doi: 10.21608/jfcr.2024.276285.1077
Kirollos Ashraf Rafla; Rana Mahmoud Sherif; Lomaya Ghanem. "Accuracy of Two Digital Scanners (Intraoral, Extraoral) Compared to Conventional Impression Using Implant with Different Angulations (Zero, 15°,25°) “In-Vitro Study”". Journal of Fundamental and Clinical Research, 4, 2, 2024, 172-188. doi: 10.21608/jfcr.2024.276285.1077
Rafla, K., Sherif, R., Ghanem, L. (2024). 'Accuracy of Two Digital Scanners (Intraoral, Extraoral) Compared to Conventional Impression Using Implant with Different Angulations (Zero, 15°,25°) “In-Vitro Study”', Journal of Fundamental and Clinical Research, 4(2), pp. 172-188. doi: 10.21608/jfcr.2024.276285.1077
Rafla, K., Sherif, R., Ghanem, L. Accuracy of Two Digital Scanners (Intraoral, Extraoral) Compared to Conventional Impression Using Implant with Different Angulations (Zero, 15°,25°) “In-Vitro Study”. Journal of Fundamental and Clinical Research, 2024; 4(2): 172-188. doi: 10.21608/jfcr.2024.276285.1077
Accuracy of Two Digital Scanners (Intraoral, Extraoral) Compared to Conventional Impression Using Implant with Different Angulations (Zero, 15°,25°) “In-Vitro Study”
1Post Graduate Researcher, Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Misr International University, Cairo, Egypt
2Professor of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
3Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Misr International University, Cairo, Egypt
Abstract
Background: Achieving passive fit for implant-supported restorations on multiple abutments with varied implant angulations is challenging with conventional impressions due to distortion. Digital scanning offers potential for greater accuracy in such cases. Aim of the study: To evaluate intraoral and extraoral scanners' accuracy compared to conventional impressions across different implant angulations (0°, 15°, 25°). Materials and Methods: Three epoxy models with implants at various angles were scanned by InEos X5 for reference. Conventional PVS impressions (n=15), scanning with intraoral Primescan (n=15), and extraoral Trios 3shape (n=15) were tested. Impressions were converted to STL format and analyzed for trueness and precision using digital control surface matching software GeoMagic Control X. Statistical analysis was conducted using two-way ANOVA. Results: Significant statistical differences were found among the groups, with Trios desktop scanner exhibiting the best trueness and precision (p < 0.001), followed by Primescan IOS and PVS impressions. Implant angulation significantly influenced trueness (p < 0.001), with higher deviations at 25°, followed by 15° and 0°, except for Primescan IOS, where no statistically significant difference was found between 15° and 0° angulations. Conclusion: parallel implants have the best accuracy in terms of trueness and precision. The use of desktop scanners offers the highest accuracy regardless of the implant angulations.
View on SCiNiTO
Top