ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2024
Accuracy of 3 Intraoral Scanners in Recording Impressions for Full Arch Dental Implant-Supported Prosthesis: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Arch- and Morphology-Related Variation in Early Marginal Bone Remodeling of Monolithic Zirconia Full-Arch Prostheses: An Exploratory Prospective Cohort Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effect of Die Ditching on the Marginal Fit of CAD/CAM-Fabricated Co-Cr Crowns: An In Vitro Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of magnification- and fluorescence-guided techniques for composite restoration removal during endodontic retreatment among undergraduate and postgraduate dental students.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Assessment of Composite Attachment Wear in Clear Aligner Therapy: A Prospective Cohort Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Trueness and Precision of Intraoral Scanners for 3D-Printed Orthodontic Models with Attachments: An In Vitro Comparative Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Accuracy of digitally fabricated partial coverage ceramic restorations using conventional impression and intraoral scanners.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Mapping Error Propagation in Intraoral Scanning Using Reason's Swiss-Cheese Model: An In Vitro Study of Precision Under Repeatability Conditions.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions using conventional scanbodies, ScanTransfers, and splinted ScanTransfers: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- In Vitro Accuracy Analysis of Intraoral Scanning Strategies: A Comparison of Two Contemporary IOS Systems.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Digital Impressions of Implants With Angulated and Different Vertical Positions in the Full Arch: An In Vitro Study.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- 3D Printing in custom tray design for complete dentures in patients with flabby tissues.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of relative deviations in virtual articulators for simulating occlusal contacts at increased vertical dimensions.The journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2025Article
- Trueness of Complete-Arch Implant Scans: Influence of Scanning Technique, Intraoral Scanner, and Implant Position (Part I: Linear and Angular Deviations).Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of an AI-Assisted Digital Workflow for Complete-Arch Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Comparative Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Analog and Digital Full-Arch Mandibular Impressions: In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison Of Transfer Accuracy Among Hexed Implant Mounts, Clips Impression Copings, And Open-Tray Impression Copings at Different Implant Angulations: An In Vitro Study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study used an edentulous mandibular resin model with 6 parallel osteotomy sites and aimed to compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of 10 digital impressions using 3 intraoral scanners, the 3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan, using Medit Link v3.3.2 software. MATERIAL AND METHODS A model simulating a patient's lower jaw was surgically prepared at 6 parallel sites (implant osteotomy), allowing placement of 6 implant analogues. Matrix-Direct transfer abutments were attached to the analogs, and a reference scan was obtained using a CeramilMap 600 extraoral scanner. Three intraoral scanners (3Shape TRIOS 5, Medit i700, and Primescan) made 10 digital impressions of each model. The data obtained were superimposed and compared using software (Medit Link 3.3.2) to evaluate accuracy. Mean values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test. Differences were considered significant at a P value of less than 0.05. RESULTS The TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation for precision (37.8±4.53 μm) and trueness (54.9±11 μm), followed by Medit i700 (precision 40.6±4.17 μm, trueness 60.5±10.9 μm), whereas the highest deviation (precision: 49.1±8.31 μm, trueness: 72.3±10.4 μm) was reported when Primescan intraoral scanner was used for recording impressions of full arch implants. When the 3 intraoral scanners were compared, a statistically significant difference was observed in terms of precision (P<0.005) and trueness (P<0.005). CONCLUSIONS TRIOS 5 intraoral scanner displayed the lowest deviation values for precision and trueness (more accurate), followed by Medit i700 and Primescan intraoral scanners. However, deviation values of all scanners were within clinically acceptable limits.
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.