Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners

Purpose: Compare the accuracy of intraoral digital impression in full-arch implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis acquired with eight different intraoral scanner (Ios). Methods: A polymethyl methacrylate acrylic model of an edentulous mandible with six scan-abutment was used as a master model and its dimensions measured with a coordinate measuring machine. Eight different Ios were used to generate digital impression: True Definition, Trios, Cerec Omnicam, 3D progress, CS3500, CS3600, Planmeca Emelard and Dental Wings. Fifteen digital impressions were made. A software called “Scan-abut” was developed to analyse and compare the digital impression with the master model, obtaining the scanning accuracy. The three-dimensional (3D) position and distance analysis were performed. Results: Mean value of the 3D position analysis showed that the True Definition (31 μm ± 8 μm) and Trios (32 μm ± 5 μm) have the best performance of the group. The Cerec Omnicam (71 μm ± 55 μm), CS3600 (61 μm ± 14 μm) have an average performance. The CS3500 (107 μm ± 28 μm) and Planmeca Emelard (101 μm ± 38 μm) present a middle-low performance, while the 3D progress (344 μm ± 121 μm) and Dental Wings (148 μm ± 64 μm) show the low performance. The 3D distance analysis showed a good linear relationship between the errors and scan-abutment distance only with the True Definition and CS3600. Conclusions: Not all scanners are suitable for digital impression in full-arch implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis and the weight of the output files is independent from the accuracy of the Ios.