Clinical study on the accuracy of wireless intraoral scanners for digital full arch impressions of dentate arches

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this clinical study was to update the literature on the scan accuracy (trueness and precision) of four modern wireless intraoral scanners (IOS) and to compare their performance with wired IOS and conventional impressions (CVI). A metallic reference aid was employed as the reference dataset.

Methods

Digital impressions were obtained from four wireless IOS (Dexis IS 3800 W, Medit i700, Primescan 2, and Trios 5), one wired IOS (Primescan AC), and one CVI in thirty patients. Scan data were analysed using 3D software, and CVI dental stone casts were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine. Scan accuracy between the reference aid and the various impression systems was compared. Statistical analysis was performed using mixed-effects ANOVA models, with significance set at p < 0.05.

Results

Statistically significant differences in trueness and precision were observed between the impression systems (p < 0.05). A significant interaction between impression system and linear distance (p < 0.05) indicated that performance varied depending on the length of scan path. The Dexis IS 3800 W and Medit i700 exhibited the greatest deviations, whereas the cloud-native Primescan 2 demonstrated comparable or superior accuracy to other impression systems.

Conclusions

Within the limitations of this clinical study, the overall accuracy of CVI remained high. Accuracy was influenced by both the impression system and the length of the scan path, with smaller deviations observed over short distances and increased inaccuracies over longer distances, particularly in diagonal and intermolar regions.

Clinical significance

Wireless IOS demonstrated statistically significant differences in certain cases, highlighting the importance of carefully evaluating the performance of each system individually.