Accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and related variables: A systematic review.

Yi-Jie Zhang, Jun-Yu Shi, Shu-Jiao Qian, Shi-Chong Qiao, Hong-Chang Lai
{"title":"Accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and related variables: A systematic review.","authors":"Yi-Jie Zhang,&nbsp;Jun-Yu Shi,&nbsp;Shu-Jiao Qian,&nbsp;Shi-Chong Qiao,&nbsp;Hong-Chang Lai","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and analyse the related variables.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An electronic search of studies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions in fully edentulous arches from 1 January 2012 to 29 February 2020 was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Only peer-reviewed experimental or clinical studies written in English were included. Studies assessing the accuracy of restorations, case reports, clinical reports, technical reports and reviews were excluded. The literature screening, article reading and assessment of risk of bias were carried out by two reviewers. The data on the study characteristics, accuracy outcomes and investigated variables were extracted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After removal of duplicates, a total of 166 studies were identified, of which 42 were initially selected for full-text reading and 30 were included in the final analysis (29 in vitro studies and one in vivo study). The trueness of digital implant impressions ranged from 7.6 to 731.7 μm, and the precision ranged from 15.2 to 204.2 μm. Angular deviations were between 0.13 and 10.01 degrees. Considering 100 μm and 0.4 degrees as clinically acceptable levels of deviation, 18 studies reported linear/distance/3D deviations larger than 100 μm and only two studies reported angular deviations below 0.4 degrees. The effect of interimplant distance/length of the arch scanned/scanning sequence/scanning range/implant position (nine studies), implant angulation (ten studies), implant depth (five studies), implant connection (two studies), operator experience (six studies), scan body type (three studies), intraoral scanner type (six studies), scanning strategy (two studies) and modification technique (three studies) was investigated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the results of the included studies, full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners are not sufficiently accurate for clinical application. Accuracy varies greatly with interimplant distance, scan body type, intraoral scanner type and operator experience, whereas implant angulation, implant connections and implant depth have no effect. The effects of scanning strategy and modification technique need further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":73463,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","volume":"14 2","pages":"157-179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and analyse the related variables.

Materials and methods: An electronic search of studies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions in fully edentulous arches from 1 January 2012 to 29 February 2020 was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Only peer-reviewed experimental or clinical studies written in English were included. Studies assessing the accuracy of restorations, case reports, clinical reports, technical reports and reviews were excluded. The literature screening, article reading and assessment of risk of bias were carried out by two reviewers. The data on the study characteristics, accuracy outcomes and investigated variables were extracted.

Results: After removal of duplicates, a total of 166 studies were identified, of which 42 were initially selected for full-text reading and 30 were included in the final analysis (29 in vitro studies and one in vivo study). The trueness of digital implant impressions ranged from 7.6 to 731.7 μm, and the precision ranged from 15.2 to 204.2 μm. Angular deviations were between 0.13 and 10.01 degrees. Considering 100 μm and 0.4 degrees as clinically acceptable levels of deviation, 18 studies reported linear/distance/3D deviations larger than 100 μm and only two studies reported angular deviations below 0.4 degrees. The effect of interimplant distance/length of the arch scanned/scanning sequence/scanning range/implant position (nine studies), implant angulation (ten studies), implant depth (five studies), implant connection (two studies), operator experience (six studies), scan body type (three studies), intraoral scanner type (six studies), scanning strategy (two studies) and modification technique (three studies) was investigated.

Conclusions: Based on the results of the included studies, full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners are not sufficiently accurate for clinical application. Accuracy varies greatly with interimplant distance, scan body type, intraoral scanner type and operator experience, whereas implant angulation, implant connections and implant depth have no effect. The effects of scanning strategy and modification technique need further investigation.

使用口腔内扫描仪和相关变量的全弓数字种植印模的准确性:一个系统的回顾。
目的:评价口腔内扫描全弓数字种植体印模的准确性,并分析相关变量。材料和方法:在PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆对2012年1月1日至2020年2月29日关于全无牙弓数字种植印模准确性的研究进行了电子检索。只包括同行评议的实验或临床研究用英文撰写。排除了评估修复体准确性的研究、病例报告、临床报告、技术报告和综述。文献筛选、文章阅读和偏倚风险评估由两名审稿人进行。提取研究特征、准确度结果和调查变量的数据。结果:去除重复后,共鉴定出166项研究,其中42项初步入选全文阅读,30项纳入最终分析(29项体外研究,1项体内研究)。数字种植体印模的真实度为7.6 ~ 731.7 μm,精度为15.2 ~ 204.2 μm。角度偏差在0.13 ~ 10.01度之间。考虑到100 μm和0.4度是临床可接受的偏差水平,18项研究报告的线性/距离/3D偏差大于100 μm,只有2项研究报告的角度偏差小于0.4度。研究了种植体间距离/扫描弓长度/扫描顺序/扫描范围/种植体位置(9项研究)、种植体角度(10项研究)、种植体深度(5项研究)、种植体连接(2项研究)、操作人员经验(6项研究)、扫描体类型(3项研究)、口腔内扫描类型(6项研究)、扫描策略(2项研究)和修改技术(3项研究)的影响。结论:根据纳入的研究结果,使用口腔内扫描仪获得的全弓数字种植体印模对于临床应用来说不够准确。准确度受种植体间距、扫描体类型、口腔内扫描仪类型和操作人员经验的影响较大,而种植体角度、种植体连接和种植体深度对准确度没有影响。扫描策略和修饰技术的效果有待进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信