Evaluation of Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner with Different Inlay Preparation Geometry

Year 2025, Volume: 15 Issue: 2, 421 - 426, 30.06.2025

Bengü Doğu Kaya , Yunus Emre Özden , Zeynep Özkurt Kayahan , Pınar Yılmaz Atalı

https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.1623198

Abstract

Objective: This in vitro study aimed to assess the accuracy of an intraoral scanner in inlay preparations with different geometry.
Methods: The upper second premolar tooth-shaped models were designed and prepared using a 3D printer (Phrozen Mega 8K, Phrozen, Taiwan). Three distinct inlay preparation configurations were utilized, including buccal and palatal wall divergence at 6°, 8°, and 10°. The reference 3D images were acquired through scanning of each model with varying inlay preparation using an extraoral scanner (E1, 3Shape, Denmark). Thirty 3D images (samples) were obtained from each of the three models (n = 10) using an intraoral scanner (Trios 3, 3Shape, Denmark). The samples and reference images were saved in Standard Tessellation Language (STL) and imported into software (Geomagic Control X 2022, 3D Systems Inc., USA). Discrepancies between the reference image and the samples were recorded as root mean square (RMS) and standard deviation (SD). Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, and interquartile range (IQR) were used for statistical analysis with THE significance level p<.05.
Results: The RMS was highest at 6°, both of which were statistically significant from the other degrees (p<.001). Highest SD values were obtained in 10° samples (p<.001). To evaluate the infer precision with IQR, RMS values were smallest at 10° and SD values smallest at 6°.
Conclusion: The divergence angle of the preparation in the inlay cavities can potentially affect the accuracy of the intraoral scanner.

Keywords

accuracy , divergence angle , inlay , intraoral scanner , precision , trueness.

Ethical Statement

Not applicable.

References

• Son K, Lee S, Kang SH, Park J, Lee K-B, Jeon M, Yun B-J. A comparison study of marginal and internal fit assessment methods for fixed dental prostheses. J Clin Med. 2019;8(6):785. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8060785
• Revilla‐León M, Subramanian SG, Att W, Krishnamurthy VR. Analysis of different illuminance of the room lighting condition on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner. J Prosthodont. 2021;30(2):157-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13276
• Revilla‐León M, Kois DE, Kois JC. A guide for maximizing the accuracy of intraoral digital scans. Part 1: Operator factors. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023;35(1):230-240. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12985
• Gavounelis NA, Gogola C-MC, Halazonetis DJ. The effect of scanning strategy on intraoral scanner’s accuracy. Dent J. 2022;10(7):123. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj10070123
• Ozden YE, Ozkurt‐Kayahan Z, Kazazoglu E. Effect of intraoral scanning distance on the marginal discrepancy of milled interim crowns. J Prosthodont. 2024;33(1):41-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13646
• Yilmaz B, Marques VR, Guo X, Gouveia D, Abou-Ayash S. The effect of scanned area on the accuracy and time of anterior single implant scans: An in vitro study. Journal of Dentistry 2021;109:103620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103620
• Osman RB, Alharbi NM. Influence of scan technology on the accuracy and speed of intraoral scanning systems for the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2023;32(9):821-828. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13633
• Revilla‐León M, Kois DE, Kois JC. A guide for maximizing the accuracy of intraoral digital scans: Part 2—Patient factors. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023;35(1):241-249. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12993
• Revilla-León M, Sicilia E, Agustín-Panadero R, Gómez-Polo M, Kois JC. Clinical evaluation of the effects of cutting off, overlapping, and rescanning procedures on intraoral scanning accuracy. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(5):746-754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.10.017
• Park Y, Kim J-H, Park J-K, Son S-A. Scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner according to different inlay preparation designs. BMC Oral Health 2023;23(1):515. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03233-2
• Attia M, Ebeid KK. Influence of inlay preparation design on the trueness of different impression techniques. Egypt Dent J. 2019;65(3):2517-2526. https://doi.org/10.21608/EDJ.2019.72615
• 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):800-804. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13202
• Baldi A, Comba A, Rozzi D, Pereira GKR, Valandro LF, Tempesta RM, Scotti N. Does partial adhesive preparation design and finish line depth influence trueness and precision of intraoral scanners? J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(4):637e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.017
• Park J-M, Kim RJ-Y, Lee K-W. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(1):113-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.025
• Abduo J, Laskey D. Effect of preparation type on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners: An in vitro study at different levels of accuracy evaluation. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022;34(8):1221-1229. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12949
• Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60028-1
• Kang B-h, Son K, Lee K-b. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners and two laboratory scanners for a complete arch: A comparative in vitro study. Appl Sci. 2019;10(1):74. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10010074
• Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1461-1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.027
• Ciocan LT, Vasilescu VG, Răuță S-A, Pantea M, Pițuru S-M, Imre M. Comparative analysis of four different intraoral scanners: an in vitro study. Diagnostics. 2024;14(13):1453. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14131453
• Revilla-León M, Jiang P, Sadeghpour M, Piedra-Cascón W, Zandinejad A, Özcan M, Krishnamurthy V.R. Intraoral digital scans—Part 1: Influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(3):372-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.003
• Revilla-León M, Jiang P, Sadeghpour M, Piedra-Cascón W, Zandinejad A, Özcan M, Krishnamurthy V.R. Intraoral digital scans: Part 2—influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the mesh quality of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(5):575-580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.004
• Revilla‐León M, Subramanian SG, Özcan M, Krishnamurthy VR. Clinical study of the influence of ambient light scanning conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(2):107-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13135
• de Andrade GS, Luz JN, Tribst JPM, Chun EP, Bressane A, Borges ALS, Saavedra GSFAS. Impact of different complete coverage onlay preparation designs and the intraoral scanner on the accuracy of digital scans. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;131(6):1168-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.05.001
• Kim RJ-Y, Benic GI, Park J-M. Trueness of intraoral scanners in digitizing specific locations at the margin and intaglio surfaces of intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(6):779-786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.019
• Alkadi L. A comprehensive review of factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanners. Diagnostics. 2023;13(21):3291. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13213291
• Taha D, Spintzyk S, Sabet A, Wahsh M, Salah T. Assessment of marginal adaptation and fracture resistance of endocrown restorations utilizing different machinable blocks subjected to thermomechanical aging. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018;30(4):319-328. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12396
• Vecsei B, Joós-Kovács G, Borbély J, Hermann P. Comparison of the accuracy of direct and indirect three-dimensional digitizing processes for CAD/CAM systems:An in vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2017;61(2):177-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.07.001
• Goracci C, Franchi L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: A systematic review of the clinical evidence. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(4):422-428. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv077
• Amornvit P, Rokaya D, Sanohkan S. Comparison of accuracy of current ten intraoral scanners. Biomed Res Int. 2021;(1):2673040. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2673040
• Eggmann F, Blatz M. Recent advances in intraoral scanners. J Dent Res. 2024:103(13), 1349-1357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034524127193
• Ammoun R, Suprono MS, Goodacre 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):201-206. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13148
• 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):680-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.044
• Rödiger M, Heinitz A, Bürgers R, Rinke S. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions:A clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21:579-587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1924-y
• Kihara H, Hatakeyama W, Komine F, Takafuji K, Takahashi T, Yokota J. Accuracy and practicality of intraoral scanner in dentistry: A literature review. J Prosthodont Res. 2020;64(2):109-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.07.010
• Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. Quintessence Int. 2016;47(4):343-349. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a35524
• Button H, Kois JC, Barmak AB, Zeitler JM, Rutkunas V, Revilla-León M. Scanning accuracy and scanning area discrepancies of intraoral digital scans acquired at varying scanning distances and angulations among 4 different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(5):1044-1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.025
• Shah N, Thakur M, Gill S, Shetty O, Alqahtani NM, Al-Qarni MA. Validation of digital impressions’ accuracy obtained using intraoral and extraoral scanners: A systematic review. J Clin Med. 2023;12(18):5833. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12185833