Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete arch digital scan, part 2: A comparison of scan strategies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Various strategies for intraoral scanners (IOSs) can be used to scan the oral cavity. However, research on the scan range that can be clinically is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the 3-dimensional (3D) distortion of complete arch scans as part of the scan strategy and analyze the clinically recommended scan range.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A computer-aided design (CAD) reference model was obtained with an industrial scanner. A CAD test model was obtained by using 6 IOSs (TRIOS2, TRIOS3, CS3500, CS3600, i500, and Primescan) to apply 2 scan strategies and 2 dental laboratory scanners (DOF and E1) (N=15). All the teeth were segmented in the reference model by using 3D inspection software (Geomagic control X). The 3D analysis was performed by aligning the test model to the reference model and evaluating the root mean square values of all segmented teeth. The Mann-Whitney U-test was performed for a statistical comparison of the 2 scan strategies (α=.05), the Kruskal-Wallis test (α=.05) was used to compare the scanners, and the Mann-Whitney U-test and Bonferroni correction method were used as post hoc tests (α=.0017).

RESULTS

The 8 scanners obtained significant differences in the root mean square values of all teeth (P<.001). The root mean square value of IOSs increased from the left maxillary second molar to the right maxillary second molar. The difference in the 2 scan strategies showed different patterns depending on the IOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Scan strategy 2 improved the accuracy of the IOSs. TRIOS2 and CS3500 are for single crowns; TRIOS3, CS3600, and i500 are for short-span prostheses; and Primescan is for long-span prostheses.