Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique.

J Prosthet Dent

Professor, Department of Dentistry, Charles University, 2nd Medical Faculty and Faculty Hospital Motol, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address:

Published: September 2024

Statement Of Problem: Intraoral scanners have many advantages but have limited applicability for extensive tooth-supported or implant-supported prostheses because of merging errors.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the reverse scan technique (RST) with an intraoral scanner using the traditional impression technique both in vitro and in vivo.

Material And Methods: A participant was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner. Then, the RST was performed 3 times in the oral cavity. One of the intraoral scans was chosen to make a 3-dimensionally (3D) printed cast. The printed cast was scanned 10 times with a laboratory scanner (Control cast) and 10 times with an intraoral scanner (IOS cast). The RST was performed 10 times (RST cast), and 10 dental impressions were made using the traditional splinted technique on the same cast (Impression cast). A laboratory scanner was used to obtain standard tessellation language (STL) files of the tested methods. A newly developed pyramid replacement method was used to evaluate accuracy. This method uses modified virtual abutments with integrated pyramids that determine the exact measurement points. The obtained data were processed using Procrustes analysis and statistically analyzed (α=.05).

Results: The Procrustes distances were Control cast 0 to 0.4 µm (median 0.3 µm), RST cast 5.6 to 6.9 µm (median 6.2 µm), Impression cast 5.4 to 7.1 µm (median 6.5 µm), and IOS cast group 4.5 to 41.2 µm (median 5.8 µm). In the participant, the Procrustes distance values were RST intraoral 9.5 to 9.6 µm (median 9.5 µm) and IOS intraoral 5.7 to 18.3 µm (median 10.9 µm).

Conclusions: The reverse scan technique is an acceptable fully digital replacement for traditional impression making. Using an IOS to obtain a 3D cast of an implant-supported interim prosthesis with scannable implant analogs is not recommended. It is more beneficial to use laboratory scanners rather than intraoral scanners for the digitization of precision improvement devices such as bonded interim implant-supported prostheses with a scannable implant analog or solid index.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

intraoral scanner
16
reverse scan
12
scan technique
12
traditional impression
12
cast
12
ios cast
12
intraoral
9
scanner traditional
8
impression technique
8
intraoral scanners
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!