ArticleJournal of dental sciences2023
Influence of the implant scan body modifications on trueness of digital impressions.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of scan body splinting on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- The Effects of Scan Body Geometry on the Precision and the Trueness of Implant Impressions Using Intraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Comparison of the Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Software in Crown Design: An In Vitro Study.International dental journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Effects of implant angulation on digital impression accuracy remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between the alteration of implant scan bodies and the trueness of digital impressions. Materials and methods: A maxillary typodont without the right premolars and first molar was scanned with a laboratory scanner and saved as a standard triangular language (STL) file. A model from the STL file was fabricated with a 3-dimensional printer. Two implants were placed into the first premolar and first molar sites of the model, followed by the insertion of two scan bodies onto the implants. These scan bodies were divided into four test groups, based on the surface modifications. A digital impression of each typodont was made with three different intraoral scanners. An abutment was digitally seated on each implant. 120 STL files (30 for each group) of the typodont with two implants and two corresponding abutments were used for statistical analysis. Results: A total of 240 values (two implants for each typodont) were obtained after each sample (4 groups) was scanned 10 times by utilizing three intraoral scanners. The overall linear and angular discrepancies were analyzed. Group 1 showed the lowest linear discrepancy of 14.9 ± 5.4 μm while Group 4 reported the highest linear discrepancy of 137.5 ± 41.7 μm, yielding a statistical significance ( Conclusion: It has been concluded that the more adjustments made to the scan bodies, the greater the linear and angular deviations occur, compromising the trueness of the digital implant impression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.