Four Digital Intraoral Scanners versus Conventional Impression Technique: An In-Vitro Evaluation of Fit Accuracy on Multiunit Abutments for Cross Arch Implant Restorations | ||||
| Ain Shams Dental Journal | ||||
| Volume 35, Issue 3, September 2024, Page 324-333 PDF (1.21 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original articles | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/asdj.2024.298039.1326 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Reham Ragab1; Atef Shaker2; Mohamed ElKhashab   3
| ||||
| 1Implantology, Cairo university, Egypt | ||||
| 2Fixed prosthodontics, Cairo university, Egypt | ||||
| 3Prosthodontics, Cairo university | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim: This study aimed to compare the passive fit of a full-arch implant zirconium superstructure using conventional impressions versus digital impressions with four intraoral scanners. Materials and methods: Four implants were installed in an epoxy resin mandibular cast in canine-molar regions bilaterally. Twenty-five frameworks were fabricated; in Group 1, twenty milled frameworks were fabricated using 4 intraoral scanners (IOS) (Cerec primescan(G1P), Cerec Omnicom(G1O), Medit i700(G1M), and 3Shape Trios4(G1T)), while in Group 2(G2), five conventional frameworks were fabricated using a conventional splinted open tray impression technique. The passive fit of all 25 frameworks was evaluated using the Sheffield test, and the marginal gap distance was measured using a stereomicroscope when all implant screws were tightened. Results: All frameworks were considered passive using the Sheffield test. Cerec Primscan showed the lowest marginal gap values when evaluated using a stereomicroscope. 3Shape Trios4, Cerec Omnicom, and Medit i700 showed similar gap values, while the highest gap values were presented in the conventional impression group (G2). Conclusions: Intraoral scanners can be used efficiently with scan bodies in the fabrication of cross-arch implant restorations. Cerec primscan proved to be higher in precision than other tested intraoral scanners | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Implant restoration; Marginal accuracy; Gap distance; Intra-oral Scanners; Passive fit | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 166 PDF Download: 145 |
||||
