ArticleBMC oral health2026
Verification of extraoral versus intraoral scanning techniques: fit accuracy implications for 3D printed and milled zirconia crowns (An in-vitro study).
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Marginal adaptation of 3D-printed crowns: influence of preparation geometry and digitization workflow.BMC oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMarginal and internal fit significantly influence the longevity of fixed restorations. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of extraoral and intraoral scanning techniques for assessing gaps of 3D printed and milled zirconia crowns.
methodsMilled (n = 12) and 3D printed zirconia crowns (n = 12) were fabricated. Triple scan protocol was implemented for each specimen in both groups using extraoral and intraoral scanners to determine marginal and internal fit. The marginal fit was compared to predetermined marginal gap identified using stereomicroscope, whereas the internal fit was assessed in relation to a reference standard of cement space set at 70 μm during the crown design process. Comparisons between different scanners were conducted using an independent t-test for internal fit and one-way ANOVA for marginal fit.
resultsSuperimposition scans obtained from extraoral scanner revealed significantly lower gap values both internally and marginally when compared to the intraoral scans for both milled (P < 0.001, P = 0.04) and printed (P < 0.001, P < 0.001) zirconia. The values from both methods showed significant differences in internal fit compared to the reference standard (P < 0.001). The extraoral scanner showed no significant difference in marginal fit values when compared to stereomicroscope.
conclusionsThe type of scanner used and the fabrication technique both influenced the accuracy of marginal and internal fit measurements. This verification provides an insight into the accuracy of extraoral and intraoral scanners in the assessment of internal and marginal fit of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated by milling and 3D printing to aid in improving restoration retention and longevity of the fixed prostheses.
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.