Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr;32(4):325-330.
doi: 10.1111/jopr.13536. Epub 2022 May 31.

Digital vs Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Retrospective Analysis of 36 Edentulous Jaws

Panos Papaspyridakos  1   2 , Andre De Souza  1 , Matthew Finkelman  3 , Elena Sicilia  1 , Sotirios Gotsis  1 , Yo-Wei Chen  1 , Konstantinos Vazouras  1 , Konstantinos Chochlidakis  2
Affiliations

Digital vs Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Retrospective Analysis of 36 Edentulous Jaws

Panos Papaspyridakos et al. J Prosthodont. 2023 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: There is a paucity of comparative clinical studies assessing the accuracy of full-arch digital scans versus conventional implant impressions. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) deviations between full-arch digital scans and conventional implant impressions for edentulous maxillae and mandibles.

Materials and methods: Twenty-seven patients (36 edentulous jaws) were treated with one-piece, screw-retained implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses (IFCDPs). Twenty-one jaws were maxillary, and 15 were mandibular. Full-arch conventional impressions and intraoral digital scans with scan bodies and an intraoral scanner had been taken during the impression phase. Following verification of the conventional stone casts, the casts were digitized. The generated standard tessellation language (STL) files from both impression techniques were merged and analyzed with reverse engineering software. The primary aim was to evaluate the accuracy between conventional and digital full-arch scans, while the effect of the edentulous jaw in 3D accuracy was the secondary aim.

Results: The cumulative 3D (mean ± SD) deviations between virtual casts from intraoral full-arch digital scans and digitized stone casts generated from conventional implant impressions were found to be 88 ±24 μm. In the maxillary group, the mean ± SD 3D deviation was 85 ±25 μm, compared to 92 ±23 μm for the mandibular group (p = 0.444).

Conclusion: The 3D implant deviations found between the full-arch digital and conventional impressions lie within the clinically acceptable threshold. No statistically significant difference was identified between maxillary and mandibular jaws in terms of 3D deviations.

Keywords: 3D Printing; complete-arch implant impressions; dental implants; digital dentistry; digital implant impression; digital implant scans; digital workflow; full-arch; full-arch implant impressions; implant rehabilitation.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Papaspyridakos P, Vazouras K, Chen YW, et al: Digital vs conventional implant impressions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthodont 2020;29:660-678
    1. Siqueira R, Galli M, Chen Z, et al: Intraoral scanning reduces procedure time and improves patient comfort in fixed prosthodontics and implant dentistry: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig 2021;25:6517-6531
    1. Fang JH, An X, Jeong SM, et al: Digital intraoral scanning technique for edentulous jaws. J Prosthet Dent 2018;119:733-735
    1. Chochlidakis K, Papaspyridakos P, Tsigarida A et al: Digital versus conventional full-arch implant impressions: a prospective study on 16 edentulous maxillae. J Prosthodont 2020;29:281-86
    1. Papaspyridakos P, Chen YW, Gonzalez-Gusmao I, et al: Complete digital workflow in prosthesis prototype fabrication for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: a technique. J Prosthet Dent 2019;122:189-192

Substances