Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2026
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
Published on: April 29, 2014
Accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry in complete arch digital implant scanning: An in vivo prospective comparative
Abdelrahman K Eldabe1, Doaa Adel-Khattab2, Kirollos H Botros3
1Lecturer, Oral Medicine, Periodontology and Diagnosis, Faculty of Dentistry, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.
Statement Of Problem:
Intraoral scanning of complete arch implant-supported prosthesis is still not predictable in all scenarios. Photogrammetry was introduced to overcome physical and anatomic limitations. The use of a new intraoral scanner combined with photogrammetry technology in a simplified workflow may improve the ease of fabrication and accuracy of complete arch implant-supported prostheses.
Purpose:
The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the degree of trueness of a conventional intraoral scanner (IOS) and an intraoral photogrammetry scanner (IPS) for complete arch implant-supported prostheses.
Material And Methods:
Participants who had received 4 implants in an edentulous arch for an implant-supported complete arch fixed dental prosthesis were recruited. Three recordings were obtained for each participant: IOS, IPS (tests), and a conventional splinted open-tray impression (reference). Three-dimensional (ΔEUC), and angular deviations (ΔANGLE) for both groups (IOS and IPS) were evaluated and compared with the reference scan. Potential effects (correlation) of the impression device (IOS and SPG) and type of arch (maxilla and mandible) were evaluated. A paired t test was used to evaluate both the angular and 3-dimensional deviation for each implant position. A point-biserial correlation was conducted to assess the relationship between jaw type and angular and ΔEUC deviations in the 2 groups.
Results:
Thirteen edentulous arches (9 maxillae, 4 mandibles) in 11 individuals were rehabilitated with a monolithic zirconia screw-retained prosthesis supported by 4 implants, totaling 52 implants. Conventional intraoral scanners (IOS) and intraoral photogrammetry scanners (IPS) were used to scan 104 implant positions, which were then compared with the corresponding reference scans. (mean ΔEUC IOS 59.8 µm, IPS 30.7 µm; mean ΔANGLE IOS 1.4 degrees, IPS 0.78 degrees). A paired t test revealed statistical significance in favor of IPS in terms of both Euclidian and angular deviation (P<.001). In the IOS group, angular deviation had a positive statistically significant correlation with the type of arch (rpb=0.34, n=52, P=.013).
Conclusions:
The IPS significantly improved the ease and accuracy of recording complete arch implant-supported prostheses.
