Complete arch accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices: A clinical study

Intraoral scanning systems have been replacing conventional workflows in dentistry as the primary method of documentation, diagnosis, and treatment. Despite their growing adoption, the accuracy of complete arch scans remains a critical challenge.

The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate and compare the precision and trueness of 6 current intraoral scanners (IOS) for complete arch recording using a conventional high-precision impression technique as the control group.

In 10 participants, 3 complete arch scans of the maxillary and mandibular jaws were obtained using 6 IOSs - Emerald S (EME); MEDIT i900 (MED); Primescan (PRI); Primescan 2 (PS2); Aoralscan 3 (SHI); TRIOS 5 (TRI) - and 1 conventional impression (CONV) technique. CONVs were poured and digitized using a laboratory scanner. Precision was assessed from intragroup pairwise comparison, while trueness values were calculated by comparing IOS scan data with the corresponding conventional impressions using (90_10)/2-percentile values. Statistical analyses were performed using Welch ANOVA followed by Games-Howell post hoc tests and a linear mixed-effects model (P=.05).

Precision values ranged from 21 ±4 µm for CONV up to 82 ±38 µm for group EME. CONV showed significantly higher precision compared with all IOSs (P>.05). No significant difference was found among PRI, PS2, MED or between SHI and TRI (P>.05). Trueness values ranged from 41 ±10 µm (PRI) up to 96 ±29 µm (EME). A significant effect of scanner group on trueness was found (P<.001), but no significant differences were detected between MED and PS2, between PRI and PS2, or between SHI and TRI (P>.05).

For dentate complete arch recordings, the standard remains conventional high-precision material. Among IOSs, significant differences concerning accuracy were found for complete arch scans, but they did not exceed 100 µm.