Live WebinarMy 7 Key learnings with Straumann BLX Implant system
08 Apr 2020, 10:00 AM EST (New York)
Eirik Salvesen DDS
The study, which was conducted jointly by the University of Maryland in Baltimore and the University of Freiburg in Germany, aimed to compare the ability of intra-oral scanning systems of different brands to accurately scan a single molar abutment tooth in vitro. The analyses included the following six scanners: iTero (Align Technology), 3M True Definition (3M ESPE), PlanScan (Planmeca), CS 3500 (Carestream Dental), TRIOS and CEREC AC Omnicam (Sirona Dental Systems).
In order to compare the accuracy of each system, the investigators used an industrial-grade, highly accurate reference scanner to create a digital reference dataset for an acrylic dental model. A single trained, experienced dentist then scanned the acrylic model on three separate occasions using each of the six intra-oral scanning systems.
Trueness (accuracy) was defined by superimposing the three digital datasets over the reference dataset, with 3-D comparisons then performed. Precision (consistency) was defined by superimposing each dataset over the other two datasets obtained and then evaluating for 3-D deviations.
Of the 18 datasets analysed, the smallest deviations for the trueness measurements (± standard deviation) between the reference dataset and the various intra-oral scanner datasets were obtained from TRIOS (6.9 ± 0.9 µm), followed by CS 3500 (9.8 ± 0.8 µm), iTero (9.8 ± 2.5 µm), 3M True Definition (10.3 ± 0.9 µm), PlanScan (30.9 ± 10.8 µm) and CEREC AC Omnicam (45.2 ± 17.1 µm).
As for precision values, here too 3Shape’s TRIOS was identified as the most accurate (4.5 ± 0.9 µm), followed by 3M True Definition (6.1 ± 1.0 µm), iTero (7.0 ± 1.4 µm), CS 3500 (7.2 ± 1.7 µm), CEREC AC Omnicam (16.2 ± 4.0 µm), and PlanScan (26.4 ± 5.0 µm).
“The TRIOS scanning technology, in combination with the wand design, seems to be beneficial for capturing high quality datasets with excellent trueness and precision values,” the investigators said.
However, the results obtained do not provide any information about the quality of a fabricated restoration based on these digital datasets, the researchers stressed. Moreover, in an in vivo design, the outcomes might be different owing to the presence of blood, saliva, and patient movements, they concluded.
The study, titled “Evaluation of the accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices: An in-vitro investigation”, was published in Volume 10, Issue 4, of the ADA Professional Product Review.