Abstract:Statement of problem: Multiple factors can influence the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs). However, the impact of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of IOSs for fabricating tooth-supported crowns remains uncertain. Purpose: The purpose of the present in vitro study was to measure the influence of scan extension (half or complete arch scan) and the starting quadrant (same quadrant or contralateral quadrant of the location of the crown preparation) on the accuracy of four IOSs. Material and methods: A typodont with a crown preparation on the left first molar was digitized (T710) to obtain a reference scan. Four scanner groups were created: TRIOS 5, PrimeScan, i700, and iTero. Then, 3 subgroups were defined based on the scan extension and starting quadrant: half arch (HA subgroup), complete arch scan starting on the left quadrant (CA-same subgroup), and complete arch scan starting on the right quadrant (CA-contralateral subgroup), (n=15). The reference scan was used as a control to measure the root mean square (RMS) error discrepancies with each experimental scan on the tooth preparation, margin of the tooth preparation, and adjacent tooth areas. Two-way ANOVA and pairwise multiple comparisons were used to analyze trueness (α=.05). The Levene and pairwise comparisons using the Wilcoxon Rank sum tests were used to analyze precision (α=.05). Results: For the tooth preparation analysis, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.002). The iTero and TRIOS5 groups obtained better trueness than the PrimeScan and i700 groups (P<.001). Moreover, half arch scans obtained the best trueness, while the CA-contralateral scans obtained the worst trueness (P<.001). The iTero group showed the worst precision among the IOSs tested. For the margin of the tooth preparation evaluation, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The iTero group obtained best trueness (P<.001), but the worst precision (P<.001) among the IOSs tested. Half arch scans obtained the best trueness and precision values. For the adjacent tooth analysis, trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups tested (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The TRIOS 5 obtained the best trueness and precision. Half arch scans obtained the best accuracy. Conclusions: Scan extension and the starting quadrant impacted the scanning trueness and precision of the IOSs tested. Additionally, the IOSs showed varying scanning discrepancies depending on the scanning area assessed. Half arch scans presented the highest trueness and precision, and the complete arch scans in which the scan started in the contralateral quadrant of where the crown preparation was obtained the worst trueness and precision.

The Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in Maxillary Defects with Different Model Variations

Influence of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of four intraoral scanners for fabricating tooth-supported crowns

Accuracy of maxillary full-arch digital impressions of tooth and implant models made by two intraoral scanners

Evaluation of the trueness of intraoral scanning for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defect

Comparison of Intraoral Scanning Modes in Three Distinct Full- Arch Digital Implant Impression Scenarios: An In Vitro Study

The impact of mandibular partial edentulous distal extension on virtual occlusal record accuracy when using two different intraoral scanners: An in vitro analysis

Accuracy of conventional impressions and digital scans for implant-supported fixed prostheses in maxillary free-ended partial edentulism: An In Vitro Study

Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning Versus Conventional Impressions for Partial Edentulous Patients with Maxillary Defects

The Effect of Different Intraoral Scanners on The Accuracy of Bite Registration in Edentulous Maxillary and Mandibular Arches

Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning of Edentulous Jaws with and Without Resin Markers.

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

Evaluation and comparison of the accuracy of three intraoral scanners for replicating a complete denture

Complete-arch accuracy of seven intraoral scanners measured by the virtual-fit method

[Quantitative Study of Intraoral Scanners' Accuracy].

Scan accuracy of wireless intraoral scanners while digitizing a combined scan body-healing abutment system

Update on the Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions in 2023: A Coordinate-Based Analysis

Do intraoral scanning technologies affect the trueness of dental arches with crowding, diastema, and edentulous spaces? A clinical perspective

An Evaluation of the Accuracy of Digital Models-An In Vitro Study

Comparison of Different Intraoral Scanners With Prefabricated Aid on Accuracy and Framework Passive Fit of Digital Complete-Arch Implant Impression: An In Vitro Study

Coordinate-based data analysis of the accuracy of five intraoral scanners for scanning completely dentate and partially edentulous mandibular arches

Scanning Accuracy of 10 Intraoral Scanners for Single-crown and Three-unit Fixed Denture Preparations: an in Vitro Study.