Search

Objectives: An impression accuracy study using a cadaver maxilla was performed using both prepared and intact teeth as well as palatal tissue., Materials and Methods: Three crown preparations were performed on a cadaver maxilla. Seven different digital impression systems along with polyvinylsiloxane impressions were used to create digital models of the maxilla. Three-dimensional (3D) files of the experimental models were compared to a master model. The 3D files were overlaid and analyzed using a comparison software to create color coded figures that were measured for deviations between the master and experimental models., Results: For scanning tooth structure, only the Planscan was significantly less accurate than the rest of impression techniques. No significant differences in accuracy were found between models created using digital impressions and those created from traditional vinyl polysiloxane impressions with cross arch deviations ranging from 18 to 39 μm for each., Conclusions: Impressions taken using all digital impression systems, save for the Planscan, were able to accurately replicate the tissues of a complete arch human maxilla., Clinical Significance: Studies examining accuracy of digital impression systems have generally been performed on materials other than dental tissues. Optically, materials such as plastic and metal have properties different from enamel and dentin. This study evaluates accuracy of digital impression systems on human dentin, enamel, and soft tissues., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: Clinicians have been slow to adopt digital impression technologies due possibly to perceived technique sensitivities involved in data acquisition. This research has two aims: determine whether scan pattern and sequence affects the accuracy of the three-dimensional (3D) model created from this digital impression and to compare the 5 imaging systems with regards to their scanning accuracy for sextant impressions., Materials and Methods: Six digital intraoral impression systems were used to scan a typodont sextant with optical properties similar to natural teeth. The impressions were taken using five different scan patterns and the resulting digital models were overlayed on a master digital model to determine the accuracy of each scanner performing each scan pattern. Furthermore, regardless of scan pattern, each digital impression system was evaluated for accuracy to the other systems in this same manner., Results: No differences of significance were noted in the accuracy of 3D models created using six distinct scan patterns with one exception involving the CEREC Omnicam. Planmeca Planscan was determined to be the truest scanner while 3Shape Trios was determined to be the most precise for sextant impression making., Conclusions: Scan pattern does not significantly affect the accuracy of the resulting digital model for sextant scanning., Clinical Significance: Companies who make digital impression systems often recommend a scan pattern specific for their system. However, every clinical scanning scenario is different and may require a different approach. Knowing how important scan pattern is with regards to accuracy would be helpful for guiding a growing number of practitioners who are utilizing this technology., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: When using a completely digital workflow on larger prosthetic cases it is often difficult to communicate to the laboratory or chairside Computer Aided Design and Computer Aided Manufacturing system the provisional prosthetic information. The problem arises when common hard tissue data points are limited or non-existent such as in complete arch cases in which the 3D model of the complete arch provisional restorations must be aligned perfectly with the 3D model of the complete arch preparations. In these instances, soft tissue is not enough to ensure an accurate automatic or manual alignment due to a lack of well-defined reference points. A new technique is proposed for the proper digital alignment of the 3D virtual model of the provisional prosthetic to the 3D virtual model of the prepared teeth in cases where common and coincident hard tissue data points are limited. Clinical considerations: A technique is described in which fiducial composite resin dots are temporarily placed on the intraoral keratinized tissue in strategic locations prior to final impressions. These fiducial dots provide coincident and clear 3D data points that when scanned into a digital impression allow superimposition of the 3D models., Conclusions: Composite resin dots on keratinized tissue were successful at allowing accurate merging of provisional restoration and post-preparation 3D models for the purpose of using the provisional restorations as a guide for final CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Composite resin dots placed temporarily on attached tissue were successful at allowing accurate merging of the provisional restoration 3D models to the preparation 3D models for the purposes of using the provisional restorations as a guide for final restoration design and manufacturing. In this case, they allowed precise superimposition of the 3D models made in the absence of any other hard tissue reference points, resulting in the fabrication of ideal final restorations., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)