Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2025
Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
Accuracy of full-arch digitalization for partially edentulous jaws - a laboratory study on basis of coordinate-based
Panagiotis Kontis1, Jan-Frederik Güth2, Christine Keul3
1Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Objectives:
To compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of direct digitization of four different dental gap situation with two IOS (intraoral scanner).
Materials And Methods:
Four partially edentulous polyurethane mandible models were used: (1) A (46, 45, 44 missing), (2) B (45, 44, 34, 35 missing), (3) C (42, 41, 31, 32 missing), and (4) D (full dentition). On each model, the same reference object was fixed between the second molars of both quadrants. A dataset (REF) of the reference object was generated by a coordinate measuring machine. Each model situation was scanned by (1) OMN (Cerec AC Omnicam) and (2) PRI (Cerec Primescan AC) (n = 30). Datasets of all 8 test groups (N = 240) were analyzed using inspection software to determine the linear aberrations in the X-, Y-, Z-axes and angular deviations. Mann-Whitney U and two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests were used to detect differences for trueness and precision.
Results:
PRI revealed higher trueness and precision in most of the measured parameters ([Formula: see text] 120.95 to 175.01 μm, [Formula: see text](x) - 58.50 to - 9.40 μm, [Formula: see text] (z) - 70.35 to 63.50 μm), while OMN showed higher trueness for [Formula: see text] (y) regardless of model situation (- 104.90 to 34.55 μm). Model D revealed the highest trueness and precision in most of the measured parameters regardless of IOS ([Formula: see text] 120.95 to 195.74 μm, [Formula: see text] (x) - 9.40 to 66.75 μm,[Formula: see text] (y) - 14.55 to 51.50 μm, [Formula: see text] (z) 63.50 to 120.75 μm).
Conclusions:
PRI demonstrated higher accuracy in the X- and Z-axes, while OMN depicted higher trueness in the Y-axis. For PRI, Model A revealed the highest distortion, while for OMN, Model B produced the largest aberrations in most parameters. Clinical relevance Current results suggest that both investigated IOS are sufficiently accurate for the manufacturing of tooth-borne restorations and orthodontic appliances. However, both hardware specifications of IOS and the presence of edentulous gaps in the dental model have an influence on the accuracy of the virtual model dataset.
