Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 13, 2026

Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
Clinical Evaluation of Intraoral, In-Lab Scanners and PVS Impression Materials Using STL Superimposition
Nader Abdulhameed1, Inessa Slipak2, Alexandra Manibo2
1Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Abstract:
Background/Objective. The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that there is no significant difference between intraoral scanners and in-lab scanners. An additional objective is to test the hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the accuracy of two types of polyvinyl siloxane PVS impression materials and between PVS impression materials and intraoral scanners. Material and Methods. Fourteen subjects received a set of maxillary and mandibular removable complete dentures [RCD]. Impressions of each RCD were obtained using two PVS impression materials (heavy [H] or medium [M] body with light [L] body). Each RCD was then scanned utilizing two intraoral scanners, Trios [TR] and Omnicam [OM]. The PVS impressions were sent to the lab to be further scanned by an in-lab scanner. STL files of the intraoral and in-lab scans were obtained and trimmed using the GeoMagic X Software. The files were merged [TR vs. OM] and [TR vs. in Lab], [HL vs. ML], [HL vs. TR] and [ML vs. TR] and the gap was measured in sixty points for each merged file. Results. There was no significant difference between [TR vs. OM] with a mean of 44 ± 10 μm. There was a statistically significant difference between [TR vs. In lab] with a mean of 62 ± 21 μm and [ML vs. TR] and [HL vs. ML] with means of 66 ± 24 μm and 50 ± 21 μm, respectively. There was no significant difference between [HL vs. TR] with a mean of 37 ± 10 μm. Conclusions. Intraoral scanners provide a similar quality of scans. The lab scanner depends on the impression materials used. The first null hypothesis was rejected. Using a heavy and light body PVS impression material provides more accurate and dimensionally stable impressions, particularly in full-arch applications, and is comparable to intraoral scanners. The second null hypothesis was rejected, there were significant differences between the PVS groups. These findings guide clinicians in selecting impression methods for complete dentures.
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System III: X-Ray
Definition and Purpose
An X-ray, or radiograph, is a non-invasive method that uses ionizing radiation to take images of internal structures. It is mainly used in cardiac imaging to examine the heart, lungs, and major blood vessels, aiming to identify abnormalities in the heart's size, shape, and position, such as heart failure, congenital defects, and vascular...
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography

