Effect of implant scan body geometric modifications on the trueness and scanning time of complete arch intraoral implant digital scans: An in vitro study

Ghida Lawand; Yara Ismail; Marta Revilla-León; Hani Tohme

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.004

Effect of implant scan body geometric modifications on the trueness and scanning time of complete arch intraoral implant digital scans: An in vitro study

J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Jul 18:S0022-3913(22)00378-X. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.004. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Ghida Lawand¹, Yara Ismail², Marta Revilla-León³, Hani Tohme⁴

Affiliations

¹ Resident, Department of Prosthodontics and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. Electronic address: ghida.lawand@net.usj.edu.lb.
² Resident, Department of Prosthodontics and Esthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
³ Affiliate Assistant Professor, Graduate Prosthodontics, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash; Director of Research and Digital Dentistry, Kois Center, Seattle, Wash; Adjunct Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Tufts University, Boston, Mass.
⁴ Founder and Head of Digital Dentistry Unit, Postgraduate Program Director, Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Saint Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.

PMID: 35864021
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.004

Abstract

Statement of problem: The effect of the surface geometry of implant scan bodies (ISBs) on the accuracy and scanning time of complete-arch implant digital scans remains uncertain.

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate whether geometric modifications on implant scan bodies (nonmodified, subtractively modified, and additively modified ISBs) affect the trueness and scanning time of complete-arch intraoral implant digital scans.

Material and methods: A completely edentulous maxillary cast with 2 anterior parallel and two 17-degree posteriorly tilted implant abutment analogs was prepared. A digitized reference was created from this cast with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) (CARES Mono Scanbody for screw-retained abutment) ISBs by using a desktop scanner (E3). Three different groups were created: nonmodified (NM group), subtractively modified (SM group), and additively modified (AM group). For the NM group, no modifications were made to the ISBs. For the SM group, 4 round-shaped grooves were created on the buccal, lingual, mesial, and distal sides. For the AM group, PEEK beads were printed and cemented on the same areas of the ISB of the SM group. Fifteen consecutive scans were captured with an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3) for each group, and the scanning time was recorded. By using a metrology software program, scans of each group were superimposed on the reference file to determine the 3D surface, linear, and angular position discrepancies of each ISB. Repeated-measures analyses of variance followed by univariate analysis and Bonferroni multiple comparison tests were performed to analyze the data (α=.05). To compare the mean time among groups, 1-way analysis of variance was performed followed by the Tukey post hoc tests.

Results: Significant 3D surface, linear, and angular position discrepancies were found when measuring trueness among the NM, SM, and AM groups (P<.001). Discrepancies in 3D surface deviation were highest for the AM group (0.266 ±0.030 mm), and the lowest mean angular deviation values were for the SM group (0.993 ±0.062 degrees). However, the mean scanning time was not significantly different among the groups tested (P=.237).

Conclusions: For complete-arch intraoral implant digital scans, subtractive modifications on ISBs enhanced scanning trueness, while additive modifications on ISBs decreased scanning trueness. However, implant scan body geometric modifications did not affect scanning time.