Comparing the accuracy of distinct scanning systems and their impact on marginal/internal adaptation of tooth-supported indirect restorations. A scoping review

Abstract

Objective: To summarize the existing scientific evidence on the effect of distinct intraoral (IOS) and extraoral (EOS) scanners in terms of their accuracy for image acquisition and the marginal/internal adaptation of indirect restorations.

Methods: The protocol of this scoping review is available online (https://osf.io/cwua7/). A structured search, with no date restriction, was performed in LILACS, MEDLINE via Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus, for articles written in English. The inclusion criteria were studies that considered at least two scanners, regardless of method (intra or extraoral), for the production of tooth-supported restorations. Two independent and blinded researchers screened the studies, collected and analyzed the data descriptively.

Results: 103 studies were included (55 on marginal/internal adaptation, 33 on accuracy, 5 on both outcomes, and 10 reviews). Most of them, shown clinically acceptable adaptation (<120 μm). Factors commonly related to the performance of scanners are: use of anti-reflection powders, method of image acquisition, and restoration/tooth characteristics. The need of anti-reflection powders was controversial. Different scanning principles seems to result on similar performance; IOS that combine them could be promising. The most explored systems were Omnicam - IOS, and inEos X5 - EOS, which showed similar performance on marginal/internal adaptation. Scarce studies explored the performance of EOS systems, especially in terms of accuracy. Different restoration designs as single-unit seemed not to modify the performance of scanners. Limited information is available regarding the planned cement space, restorative material and design (multi-unit restorations), as also techniques to measure adaptation.

Conclusions: Digital scanners are valid approaches to obtain accurate impressions resulting in clinically acceptable restorations. Systems that uses combined principles of image acquisition seems promising for optimal performance. Based on high discrepancy, the quality of evaluated evidence is low, and well-designed studies are still encouraged, especially considering validated IOS/EOS as a control comparison condition.

Keywords: Computer-aided design. Dental impression technique. Dental marginal adaptation. Dimensional measurement accuracy.