Yuyeon Kim, Donghyun Kim, Hyeonseong Son, Seoung-Jin Hong, Hyeong-Seob Kim, Ahran Pae
{"title":"Effect of the Number and Angulation of Implants on the Accuracy of Digital Impression in Completely Edentulous Arches.","authors":"Yuyeon Kim, Donghyun Kim, Hyeonseong Son, Seoung-Jin Hong, Hyeong-Seob Kim, Ahran Pae","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the accuracy of impression methods using an intraoral scanner and the conventional method based on the implant number and angulation with multiple implants.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Six implants were placed in the maxillary edentulous typodont using 3D-modeling software. Eight implants were placed in another maxillary edentulous typodont. The implant placement angulation for each model was different. 3D designing and printing were performed to produce reference models. These models were scanned to obtain reference scan data (RSD). In the conventional impression method, reference models were used, and a gypsum model was produced. Scan data was obtained by the lab scanner (Group CI). Models were scanned, and the scan data was obtained (Group IS). The distance and angulation deviation were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In models with six implants, the mean values of all distance and angulation deviations were less in Group CI than in Group IS (P < .05), except for the distance deviation in Model 6-20. In models with eight implants, the mean values of distance and angulation deviations were less in Group CI than in Group IS, except for the distance deviation in Model 8-20, and significant differences were observed between the two groups for Models 8-0, 8-10, and 8-20 (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In cases where multiple implants are placed in the completely edentulous arch in vitro, conventional impressions are more accurate than intraoral scans. In cases lacking implant parallelism, intraoral scans can be used as a replacement for conventional impressions.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"665-676"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9174","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 impression methods using an intraoral scanner and the conventional method based on the implant number and angulation with multiple implants.
Materials and methods: Six implants were placed in the maxillary edentulous typodont using 3D-modeling software. Eight implants were placed in another maxillary edentulous typodont. The implant placement angulation for each model was different. 3D designing and printing were performed to produce reference models. These models were scanned to obtain reference scan data (RSD). In the conventional impression method, reference models were used, and a gypsum model was produced. Scan data was obtained by the lab scanner (Group CI). Models were scanned, and the scan data was obtained (Group IS). The distance and angulation deviation were compared.
Results: In models with six implants, the mean values of all distance and angulation deviations were less in Group CI than in Group IS (P < .05), except for the distance deviation in Model 6-20. In models with eight implants, the mean values of distance and angulation deviations were less in Group CI than in Group IS, except for the distance deviation in Model 8-20, and significant differences were observed between the two groups for Models 8-0, 8-10, and 8-20 (P < .05).
Conclusions: In cases where multiple implants are placed in the completely edentulous arch in vitro, conventional impressions are more accurate than intraoral scans. In cases lacking implant parallelism, intraoral scans can be used as a replacement for conventional impressions.