Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2025
Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
In vivo trueness of full-arch implant-supported CAD/CAM restorations and models based on conventional impressions
Robert Nedelcu1, Pontus Olsson2, Måns Thulin3
1Department of Surgical Sciences, Plastic & Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Uppsala University, 751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.; UWA Dental School, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, WA, 6009, Australia.
Objectives:
To evaluate a method for in situ reference acquisition of implant positions in complete edentulous maxillae using an industrial scanner. To assess in vivo trueness of full-arch implant-supported fixed dentures (IFD) and dental models based on conventional impressions.
Methods:
In five subjects, scan-bodies were mounted to six maxillary implants and scanned three times using an industrial scanner (REF). Original impression-based models used to manufacture existing IFDs, (MOD1), and models fabricated from new polyether impressions, (MOD2), were scanned three times with a laboratory scanner. Scan-bodies were aligned and exported with analogue positions corresponding to implant positions. Implant analogues were mounted onto existing IFDs and scanned three times (BRIDGE). CAD files of scan-bodies with inter-aligned CAD-analogues were geometry-aligned to REF. CAD-analogues were aligned to exported files of MOD1 and MOD2, and to BRIDGE. Resulting six CAD-analogues were Globally Aligned using a consistent geometry-based alignment. Deviations were computed after a Reference Point System Alignment at the implant/prosthetic platform for Cartesian axes and a linear Resultant.
Results:
REF precision was 9.3 ± 1 µm. In vivo trueness for Resultant was MOD1: 36±16 µm, MOD2: 28±7 µm and BRIDGE: 70±23 µm, where MOD1 and MOD2 were statistically significantly different from BRIDGE. In vitro manufacturing trueness of Resultant when MOD1 acted reference for BRIDGE was: 69 ± 22.
Conclusions:
This method can be applied for assessing in vivo trueness. CAD/CAM processed IFD showed deviations twice that of impression-based models, however, errors from impressions and subsequent model scans were not additive to the entire workflow.
