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
Comparative Study
. 2025 Feb 26:13:e19075.
doi: 10.7717/peerj.19075. eCollection 2025.

Trueness and precision of complete denture digital impression compared to conventional impression: an in vitro study

Yousif A Al-Dulaijan  1 , Haidar Alalawi  1 , Mohammed M Gad  1 , Faisal D Al-Qarni  1 , Shaimaa M Fouda  1 , Passent Ellakany  2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Trueness and precision of complete denture digital impression compared to conventional impression: an in vitro study

Yousif A Al-Dulaijan et al. PeerJ. .

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the precision and trueness of digital impressions of the edentulous arch made with different scanners to conventional physical impressions.

Methods: A total of 40 impressions of a completely edentulous maxillary arch model (n = 10) were made using different digital impressions with an extraoral scanner, E3 3Shape desktop scanner, as the reference scan, intraoral scanner (TRIOS IOS, and Medit IOS) and Vinyl Polysiloxane impressions (VPS) impression using a Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD-CAM) custom tray. The VPS impression was scanned with the desktop scanner to produce standard tessellation language (STL) files for comparison with the digital impressions made by the Desktop and intraoral scanners. The STL files were super-imposed to a desktop scan and to each other with the same group using Geomagic Control X Software to assess the trueness and precision, respectively. A t-test was conducted for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05.

Results: The overall trueness, Medit had the highest deviation compared to the VPS and TRIOS groups with a P value of 0.0013 and <0.0001, respectively. In terms of overall precision, TRIOS had a lower deviation than the VPS group, with a P value of 0.0002. The TRIOS and Medit groups had statistically comparable results. The desktop scanner showed the highest precision in digitizing completely edentulous cases, followed by the TRIOS scanner. The Medit scanner's trueness had the highest deviation compared to the VPS and TRIOS groups.

Keywords: CAD-CAM; Complete denture; Impression; Precision; Trueness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Study flowchart.
Figure 2
Figure 2. 3D comparisons of trueness measurements.
3D comparisons of trueness measurements of the four areas (residual ridge, palate, vestibule, and overall) after the STL files were superimposed to the reference scan.
Figure 3
Figure 3. 3D comparisons of precision measurements.
3D comparisons of precision measurements of the four areas (residual ridge, palate, vestibule, and overall) after the STL files were superimposed to the reference scan.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abduo J. Accuracy of casts produced from conventional and digital workflows: a qualitative and quantitative analyses. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2019;11(2):138–146. doi: 10.4047/jap.2019.11.2.138. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abualsaud R, Alalawi H. Fit, precision, and trueness of 3D-printed zirconia crowns compared to milled counterparts. Dentistry Journal. 2022;10(11):215. doi: 10.3390/dj10110215. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ahlholm P, Sipilä K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2018;27(1):35–41. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12527. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Al Hamad KQ, Al-Kaff FT. Trueness of intraoral scanning of edentulous arches: a comparative clinical study. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2023;32(1):26–31. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13597. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bosniac P, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B. Comparison of an indirect impression scanning system and two direct intraoral scanning systems in vivo. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2019;23(5):2421–2427. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2679-4. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources