Does intra-oral scan improve the impression accuracy of full-arch implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:8
作者
Cai, Zheng-zhen [1 ,2 ]
Li, Xin [3 ]
Wu, Xin-Yu [1 ,2 ]
Lai, Hong-Chang [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Shi, Jun-Yu [1 ,2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Shanghai Peoples Hosp 9, Natl Clin Res Ctr Oral Dis,Sch Med, Shanghai Key Lab Stomatol,Dept Implant Dent,Coll S, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Shanghai Res Inst Stomatol, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Jiangnan Univ, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Stomatol, Wuxi, Peoples R China
[4] Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ, Shanghai Peoples Hosp 9, Sch Med, Dept Implant Dent, 639 Zhizaoju Rd, Shanghai 200011, Peoples R China
关键词
dental implants; digital scanning; edentulism; implant impression; intraoral scanning; MULTIPLE IMPLANTS;
D O I
10.1111/cid.13321
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectivesThe present study aimed to systematically review the studies comparing the accuracy of intraoral scan (IOS) and conventional implant impressions (CI) in completely edentulous patients.Materials and MethodsElectronic searches were performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL up to December 1, 2023. Clinical studies and in vitro studies reporting the accuracy of digital full arch impressions were included. The primary outcome is the 3-dimensional deviations between the study reference models. A risk of bias assessment was performed for clinical studies. A stratified meta-analysis and a single-armed meta-analysis were conducted.ResultsA total of 49 studies were included, with 8 clinical studies and 41 in vitro studies. For comparison between IOS and conventional impressions, studies were categorized into two groups based on the different measurement methods employed: RMS and CMM. In studies using RMS, the result favored the IOS in the unparalleled situation with the mean difference of -99.29 mu m (95% CI: [-141.38, -57.19], I2 = 81%), while the result was opposite with the mean difference of 13.62 mu m (95% CI: [10.97, 16.28], I2 = 26%) when implants were paralleled. For different brands of IOS, the accuracy ranged from 76.11 mu m (95% CI: [42.36, 109.86]) to 158.63 mu m (95% CI: [-14.68, 331.93]).ConclusionsAccuracy of intraoral scan is clinically acceptable in edentulous arches, especially for unparalleled implants. More clinical studies are needed to verify the present finding.
引用
收藏
页码:847 / 861
页数:15
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]  
Akça K, 2004, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V19, P517
[2]   Comparison of 3D accuracy of three different digital intraoral scanners in full-arch implant impressions [J].
Akkal, Ozcan ;
Korkmaz, Ismail Hakki ;
Bayindir, Funda .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2023, 15 (04) :179-188
[3]   Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Complete Arch Implant Impressions [J].
Albayrak, Berkman ;
Sukotjo, Cortino ;
Wee, Alvin G. ;
Korkmaz, Ismail Hakki ;
Bayindir, Funda .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2021, 30 (02) :163-170
[4]   Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Impression versus Conventional Method: Effect of Implant Angulation and Connection Type [J].
Alikhasi, Marzieh ;
Siadat, Hakime ;
Nasirpour, Alireza ;
Hasanzade, Mahya .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2018, 2018
[5]   TRUENESS EVALUATION OF LATEST GENERATION OF INTRAORAL SCANNERS ON COMPLETE-ARCH IMPLANT IMPRESSIONS [J].
Issever, Dilara Seyma Alpkilic ;
Deger, Sabire isler .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2023, 36 (04) :e1-e12
[6]   In Vitro Comparison of the Accuracy of Conventional Impression and Four Intraoral Scanners in Four Different Implant Impression Scenarios [J].
Alpkilic, Dilara Seyma ;
Deger, Sabire Isler .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2022, 37 (01) :39-48
[7]   Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study [J].
Amin, Sarah ;
Weber, Hans Peter ;
Finkelman, Matthew ;
El Rafie, Khaled ;
Kudara, Yukio ;
Papaspyridakos, Panos .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2017, 28 (11) :1360-1367
[8]   Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: A pilot study [J].
Andriessen, Frank S. ;
Riikens, David R. ;
van der Meer, Wither J. ;
Wismeijer, Daniell W. .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2014, 111 (03) :186-194
[9]   Accuracy of digital impressions for implant-supported complete-arch prosthesis when using an auxiliary geometry device [J].
Arikan, Hale ;
Muhtarogullari, Mehmet ;
Uzel, Sema Merve ;
Guncu, Mustafa Baris ;
Aktas, Guliz ;
Marshall, Lindsay Simone ;
Turkyilmaz, Ilser .
JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2023, 18 (02) :808-813
[10]   Effect of different intraoral scanners and scanbody splinting on accuracy of scanning implant-supported full arch fixed prosthesis [J].
Ashraf, Yasmine ;
Abo El Fadl, Ahmad ;
Hamdy, Amina ;
Ebeid, Kamal .
JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2023, 35 (08) :1257-1263