Calibrated intraoral scan protocol (CISP) for full-arch implant impressions: An in vitro comparison to conventional impression, intraoral scan, and intraoral scan with scan-aid

Junying Li; Zhaozhao Chen; Paolo Nava; Shengtao Yang; Javier Calatrava; Hom-Lay Wang

doi:10.1111/cid.13338

Calibrated intraoral scan protocol (CISP) for full-arch implant impressions: An in vitro comparison to conventional impression, intraoral scan, and intraoral scan with scan-aid

Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024 May 15. doi: 10.1111/cid.13338. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Junying Li¹, Zhaozhao Chen², Paolo Nava², Shengtao Yang^{1

3}, Javier Calatrava^{2

4}, Hom-Lay Wang²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Biologic and Materials Sciences, Division of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
² Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
³ State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Department of Dental Technology, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China.
⁴ Section of Graduate Periodontology, Faculty of Odontology, University Complutense, Madrid, Spain.

PMID: 38747500
DOI: 10.1111/cid.13338

Abstract

Objective: To assess a newly developed intraoral scan protocol in enhancing the accuracy of complete-arch implant impressions.

Materials and methods: Four impression approaches were applied to the same maxillary edentulous model with 6 implants: (1) intraoral scan (IOS), (2) intraoral scan with scan aid (IOS-SA), (3) calibrated intraoral scan protocol (CISP), and (4) conventional splinted open-tray impression (CONV). Each approach was repeated 10 times, and a direct scan of the model with a desktop scanner was used as a reference model. The alignment of scans and the reference model was conducted by two methods: (a) aligning all scan bodies to evaluate the overall fit, and (b) aligning the first and second scan bodies to simulate the Sheffield fit test for passive fitting of multiple implant-supported prostheses. Linear deviations from the reference model (trueness) and within each group (precision) were analyzed using Python scripts.

Results: When aligned by all scan bodies, the CISP group exhibited comparable mean trueness (38.33 μm) and precision (45.97 μm) to the CONV group (44.30 and 47.92 μm respectively), both of which significantly outperformed the IOS group (86.82 and 83.17 μm, respectively). Furthermore, in the virtual Sheffield fit test, the CISP group achieved the highest levels of mean trueness at the end span (121.7 μm), making a linear deviation reduction of 36.7%, 60%, and 41.4% when compared to the CONV, the IOS, and the IOS-SA groups, respectively. Moreover, the CISP group (104.3 μm) displayed a remarkable 65, 182, and 86 μm advantage in precision over the CONV, IOS, and IOS-SA groups, respectively.

Conclusion: CISP demonstrated comparable accuracy to the gold standard, the conventional splinted open-tray impression. Furthermore, it excelled in the virtual passive fitting test.

Keywords: accuracy; dental implant; dental impression; full‐arch; intraoral scanner.