Accuracy comparison of bilateral versus complete arch interocclusal registration scans for virtual articulation

Statement of problem

Alternatives to the bilateral interocclusal registration scanning technique to improve virtual articulation have not been fully investigated.

Purpose

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of virtually articulating digital casts by using bilateral interocclusal registration scans versus a complete arch interocclusal scan.

Material and methods

A set of maxillary and mandibular reference casts were hand-articulated and mounted on an articulator. The mounted reference casts were scanned, and the maxillomandibular relationship record was scanned 15 times using 2 different scanning techniques, the bilateral interocclusal registration scan (BIRS) and complete arch interocclusal registration scan (CIRS), with an intraoral scanner. The generated files were transferred to a virtual articulator, and each set of scanned casts was articulated using BIRS and CIRS. The virtually articulated casts were saved as a set and transferred to a 3-dimensional (3D) analysis program. The scanned casts were set in the same coordinate system as the reference cast and overlaid on top of the reference cast for analysis. Two anterior and 2 posterior points were selected to determine points of comparison between the reference cast and test casts virtually articulated with BIRS and CIRS. The mean discrepancy between the 2 test groups and the anterior and posterior mean discrepancy within each group were tested for significance by using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).

Results

A significant difference was found between the virtual articulation accuracy of BIRS and CIRS (P<.001). The mean deviation for BIRS was 0.053 ±0.051 mm and that for CIRS was 0.265 ±0.241 mm. Furthermore, significant differences were found between the anterior and posterior deviations in both BIRS (P=.020) and CIRS (P<.001). The mean deviation for BIRS was 0.034 ±0.026 mm in the anterior and 0.073 ±0.062 mm in the posterior. The mean deviation for CIRS was 0.146 ±0.108 mm anteriorly and 0.385 ±0.277 mm posteriorly.

Conclusions

BIRS was more accurate than CIRS for virtual articulation. Moreover, the alignment accuracy of anterior and posterior sites for both BIRS and CIRS exhibited significant differences, with the anterior alignment exhibiting better accuracy in relation to the reference cast.