Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner according to different inlay preparation designs

Authors: Yeri Park, Jae-Hoon Kim, Jeong-Kil Park, Sung-Ae Son

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The accuracy of intraoral scanning plays a crucial role in the workflow of computer-assisted design/computer-assisted manufacturing. However, data regarding scanning accuracy for inlay preparation designs are lacking. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of the depth of the occlusal cavity and width of the gingival floor of the proximal box on the trueness and precision of intraoral scans for inlay restoration.

Methods

Artificial teeth were used in this study. Four types of preparations for mesio-occlusal inlay were performed on each #36 artificial tooth depending on two different depths of the occlusal cavity (1 mm and 2 mm) and widths of the gingival floor of the proximal box (1.5 mm and 2.5 mm). Artificial teeth were scanned 10 times each with Cerec Primescan AC, and another scan was performed subsequently with a laboratory scanner as a reference (n = 10). Standard tessellation language files were analyzed using a three-dimensional analysis software program. Experimental data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and the Bonferroni multiple comparison test.

Results

The narrow shallow group had significantly higher deviation values for trueness than the wide deep group (p < 0.05). The wide deep group had the lowest average deviation value for trueness and there was no significant difference between the narrow deep and wide shallow groups (p > 0.05). For the mean maximum positive deviation, the wide groups had significantly lower values than the narrow groups (p < 0.05). Trueness was affected by both the width and depth(p < 0.05), whereas the mean maximum positive deviation was affected by the width (p < 0.05). The mean maximum negative deviation was affected by all three factors (p < 0.05). Precision was affected by the depth and the interaction between the depth of the occlusal cavity and width of the gingival floor (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The design of different inlay cavity configurations affected the accuracy of the digital intraoral scanner. The highest average deviation for trueness was observed in the narrow shallow group and the lowest in the wide deep group. With regard to precision, the narrow shallow group showed the lowest average deviation, and the narrow deep group showed highest value.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Goujat A, Abouelleil H, Colon P, Jeannin C, Pradelle N, Seux D, Grosgogeat B. Marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM inlay/onlay restorations: a systematic review of in vitro studies. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(4):590–7.CrossRefPubMed Goujat A, Abouelleil H, Colon P, Jeannin C, Pradelle N, Seux D, Grosgogeat B. Marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM inlay/onlay restorations: a systematic review of in vitro studies. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(4):590–7.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning system. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16(1):11–21.PubMed Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning system. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16(1):11–21.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Nedelcu R, Olsson P, Nyström I, Thor A. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nedelcu R, Olsson P, Nyström I, Thor A. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Son SA, Kim JH, Seo DG, Park JK. Influence of different inlay configurations and distance from the adjacent tooth on the accuracy of an intraoral scan. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128(4):680–768.CrossRefPubMed Son SA, Kim JH, Seo DG, Park JK. Influence of different inlay configurations and distance from the adjacent tooth on the accuracy of an intraoral scan. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128(4):680–768.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sami T, Goldstein G, Vafiadis D, Absher T. An in vitro 3D evaluation of the accuracy of 4 intraoral optical scanners on a 6-implant model. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(6):748–54.CrossRefPubMed Sami T, Goldstein G, Vafiadis D, Absher T. An in vitro 3D evaluation of the accuracy of 4 intraoral optical scanners on a 6-implant model. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(6):748–54.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Zimmermann M, Ender A, Mehl A. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro. J Am Dent Assoc. 2020;151(2):127–35.CrossRefPubMed Zimmermann M, Ender A, Mehl A. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro. J Am Dent Assoc. 2020;151(2):127–35.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Ashraf Y, Sabet A, Hamdy A, Ebeid K. Influence of preparation type and tooth geometry on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(9):800–4.CrossRefPubMed Ashraf Y, Sabet A, Hamdy A, Ebeid K. Influence of preparation type and tooth geometry on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(9):800–4.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference International Organization for Standardization. ISO 5725–1. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measuring methods and results. Part-I: General principles and definitions International Organization for Standardization, Berlin (1994). International Organization for Standardization. ISO 5725–1. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measuring methods and results. Part-I: General principles and definitions International Organization for Standardization, Berlin (1994).
9.
go back to reference International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9693–1. Dentistry compatibility testing. Part 1: Metal-ceramic systems. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2012. ISO Store Order: OP-184149 (Date: 2017–06–09). International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9693–1. Dentistry compatibility testing. Part 1: Metal-ceramic systems. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2012. ISO Store Order: OP-184149 (Date: 2017–06–09).
10.
go back to reference Moon W, Chung SH, Chang J. Effect of deep margin elevation on interfacial gap development of CAD/CAM Inlays after thermomechanical cycling. Oper Dent. 2021;46(5):529–36.CrossRefPubMed Moon W, Chung SH, Chang J. Effect of deep margin elevation on interfacial gap development of CAD/CAM Inlays after thermomechanical cycling. Oper Dent. 2021;46(5):529–36.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ammoun R, Suprono MS, Goodare CJ, Oyoyo U, Carrico CK, Kattadiyil MT. Influence of tooth preparation design and scan angulations on the accuracy of two intraoral digital scanners: an in vitro study based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(3):201–6.CrossRefPubMed Ammoun R, Suprono MS, Goodare CJ, Oyoyo U, Carrico CK, Kattadiyil MT. Influence of tooth preparation design and scan angulations on the accuracy of two intraoral digital scanners: an in vitro study based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(3):201–6.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kim JH, Son SA, Lee HJ, Kim JY, Park JK. In vitro analysis of intraoral digital impression of inlay preparation according to tooth location and cavity type. J Prosthodont Res. 2021;65(3):400–6.CrossRefPubMed Kim JH, Son SA, Lee HJ, Kim JY, Park JK. In vitro analysis of intraoral digital impression of inlay preparation according to tooth location and cavity type. J Prosthodont Res. 2021;65(3):400–6.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Kim JH, Son SA, Lee HJ, Yoo YJ, Hong SJ, Park JK. Influence of adjacent teeth on the accuracy of intraoral scanning systems for class II inlay preparation. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022;34(5):826–32.CrossRefPubMed Kim JH, Son SA, Lee HJ, Yoo YJ, Hong SJ, Park JK. Influence of adjacent teeth on the accuracy of intraoral scanning systems for class II inlay preparation. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022;34(5):826–32.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Park JM, Kim JY, Lee KW. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(1):113–20.CrossRefPubMed Park JM, Kim JY, Lee KW. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(1):113–20.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Shin SH, Yu HS, Cha JY, Kwon JS, Hwang CJ. Scanning accuracy of bracket features and slot base angle in different bracket materials by four intraoral scanners: an in vitro study. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(2):365.CrossRefPubMed Shin SH, Yu HS, Cha JY, Kwon JS, Hwang CJ. Scanning accuracy of bracket features and slot base angle in different bracket materials by four intraoral scanners: an in vitro study. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(2):365.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Schmidt A, Schlenz MA, Liu H, Kämpe HS, Wöstmann B. The influence of hard- and software improvement of intraoral scanners on the implant transfer accuracy from 2012 to 2021: an in vitro study. Appl Sci. 2021;11:7166.CrossRef Schmidt A, Schlenz MA, Liu H, Kämpe HS, Wöstmann B. The influence of hard- and software improvement of intraoral scanners on the implant transfer accuracy from 2012 to 2021: an in vitro study. Appl Sci. 2021;11:7166.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Keul C, Güth JF. Influence of intraoral conditions on the accuracy of full-arch scans by Cerec Primescan AC: an in vitro and in vivo comparison. Int J Comput Dent. 2022;25(1):17–25.PubMed Keul C, Güth JF. Influence of intraoral conditions on the accuracy of full-arch scans by Cerec Primescan AC: an in vitro and in vivo comparison. Int J Comput Dent. 2022;25(1):17–25.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Kim JH, Kim KB, Kim SH, Kim WC, Kim HY. Quantitative evaluation of common errors in digital impression obtained by using an LED blue light in-office CAD/CAM system. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(5):401–7.PubMed Kim JH, Kim KB, Kim SH, Kim WC, Kim HY. Quantitative evaluation of common errors in digital impression obtained by using an LED blue light in-office CAD/CAM system. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(5):401–7.PubMed
19.
go back to reference Kim KM, Kim JM, Lee YM, Lim YJ, Lee SP. The effect of scanning distance on the accuracy of intra-oral scanners used in dentistry. Clin Anat. 2019;32(3):430–43.PubMed Kim KM, Kim JM, Lee YM, Lim YJ, Lee SP. The effect of scanning distance on the accuracy of intra-oral scanners used in dentistry. Clin Anat. 2019;32(3):430–43.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner according to different inlay preparation designs
Authors
Yeri Park
Jae-Hoon Kim
Jeong-Kil Park
Sung-Ae Son
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03233-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue