Abstract:Aim The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of full‐arch conventional implant impressions using two different materials (A‐silicone and polyether) to full‐arch digital implant impressions produced from two intraoral scanning devices. Materials and Methods A master model was fabricated representing an edentulous mandible with four implants with internal connection placed at the sites of canines and first molars. The anterior implants were parallel to the residual ridge, while the two posterior implants had an angulation of 15° to the distal and 15° to the lingual respectively. The conventional technique was performed with open‐tray of non‐splinted impression copings. Two different impression materials were used, A‐silicone and polyether at monophase medium body consistencies. The digital impressions were obtained with the use of two different intraoral scanners, after the connection of scan bodies. A total of 10 impressions were produced for each of the four experimental groups. The conventional models as well as the master model were digitized using a high‐resolution laboratory scanner. The STL files of the models and of the intraoral impressions were imported in a powerful superimposition software, for the conduction of measurements in pairs of files. The software calculated the 3D deviations, as well as the linear and angular displacements among scan bodies at the digital files. For "trueness" measurements every STL file of each experimental group was superimposed to the digital master model, while for "precision" measurements all STL files of each experimental group were superimposed to each other. Results and Conclusions The accuracy of full arch mandibular implant impressions was influenced both by the impression technique used (conventional vs. digital) and the impression material used (A‐silicone vs. polyether) or the intraoral scanner used (Trios vs. Heron). In terms of "trueness," A‐silicone showed the highest impression accuracy with the lowest deviation values, followed by polyether and Trios, but the differences between the three groups were in the majority not statistically significant. Heron showed statistically lower accuracy results in all measurements compared to the other groups. In terms of "precision", conventional impressions with the use of A‐Silicone or polyether were statistically significantly superior to digital impressions with either scanner. A‐Silicone and polyether showed no statistically significant difference between them.

Three-dimensional Accuracy of Four Impression Materials for Fixed Denture

Digital measurement method for comparing the absolute marginal discrepancy of three-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses fabricated using conventional and digital technologies

Dimension change of Jeltrate alginate impression at various pouring time points

Dimensional Accuracy of Novel Vinyl Polysiloxane Compared with Polyether Impression Materials: An In Vitro Study

Comparison of the Dimensional and Morphological Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Digital Dental Casts Digitized Using Different Methods.

Evaluation of the Accuracy of Digital Impression Techniques Based on an Integrated ADA Model

In vitro comparison of accuracy between conventional and digital impression using elastomeric materials and two intra‐oral scanning devices

Study on the Effect of Different Impression Methods on the Marginal Fit of All-Ceramic Crowns

In Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of Impression Trays and Impression Materials on the Accuracy of Open Tray Implant Impressions: A Pilot Study

Relating the marginal fit of the castings to the accuracy of the impressions made from laminated hydrocolloid impression technique: a comparative study

Digital Evaluation of Trueness and Precision of Modern Impression Materials in Implant- Retained Mandibular Overdentures

Accuracy of Mandibular Removable Partial Denture Frameworks Fabricated by 3D Printing and Conventional Techniques

Accuracy of 3-dimensional printed dental models reconstructed from digital intraoral impressions

Dimensional accuracy and surface characteristics of complete-arch cast manufactured by six 3D printers

Accuracy of full arch three-dimensional dentition models from intraoral scanners

Dimensional Accuracy of Two-Step Impressions Relined with Extra-Light Addition Silicone Material

The Accuracy of a Novel 3D Digital Evaluation Method of Intraoral Fitness for Removable Partial Dentures.

Comparison of the Accuracy of Fixture-Level Implant Impression Making with Different Splinting Techniques

Dimensional Accuracy of Dental Models for Three-Unit Prostheses Fabricated by Various 3D Printing Technologies

Evaluation of Three-Dimensional Digital Models Formulated From Direct Intra-oral Scanning of Dental Arches in Comparison With Extra-oral Scanning of Poured Dental Models in Terms of Dimensional Accuracy and Reliability

[Application of the pin-hole marker measurement of the irregular silicone impression accuracy].