Accuracy between 2D Photography and Dual-Structured Light 3D Facial Scanner for Facial Anthropometry: A Clinical Study.

(1) Background: Facial scanners are used in different fields of dentistry to digitalize the soft tissues of the patient's face. The development of technology has allowed the patient to have a 3-dimensional virtual representation, facilitating facial integration in the diagnosis and treatment plan. However, the accuracy of the facial scanner and the obtaining of better results with respect to the manual or two-dimensional (2D) method are questionable.

Influence of ambient light conditions on the accuracy and scanning time of seven intraoral scanners in complete-arch implant scans.

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of ambient light illuminance on the accuracy and scanning time of different intraoral scanners (IOSs) in complete-arch implant scans.

Material And Methods: Seven IOSs (TRIOS 3, Primescan, Element 5D, i700, i500, CS3700, and CS3600) at 5 ambient lighting illuminances (100, 500, 1000, 5000, and 10 000 lux) were evaluated. An edentulous cast with 4 implants was selected as the master model.

Evaluation of peri-implant soft and hard tissues behavior in screw-retained crowns by the biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT): Ambispective longitudinal analytical study.

Background: Clinical and radiographic evaluation of soft and hard tissues around convergent collar implants and shoulderless abutments.

Material And Methods: Ambispective longitudinal analytical study with a sample size of 32 implants in 21 patients treated in a private dental clinic. Patients were divided into two groups: Prama Implants or group 1 (n=21) and Shelta implants combined with XA abutment or group 2 (n=11).

Soft tissue thickness evaluation in screw-retained crowns by the biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT).

Background: Intraoral scanner evaluation (3Shape, TRIOS®) of soft tissue thickness around convergent collar implants and shoulderless abutments.

Material And Methods: Ambispective longitudinal analytical study with a sample size of 26 implants in 17 patients treated in a private dental clinic. Pacients were divided into two groups: Prama Implants or group 1 (n=19) and Shelta implants combined with XA abutment or group 2 (n=7).