IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i4p2026-d747157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accuracy of Digital Dental Implants Impression Taking with Intraoral Scanners Compared with Conventional Impression Techniques: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies

Author

Listed:
  • María Isabel Albanchez-González

    (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann

    (Department of Dental Clinical Specialties, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Jesús Peláez-Rico

    (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Carlos López-Suárez

    (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • Verónica Rodríguez-Alonso

    (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • María Jesús Suárez-García

    (Department of Conservative Dentistry and Orofacial Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the in vitro accuracy of dental implants impressions taken with intraoral scanner compared with impressions taken with conventional techniques. Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic electronic search in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Some of the employed key terms, combined with the help of Boolean operators, were: “dental implants”, “impression accuracy”, “digital impression” and “conventional impression”. Publication dates ranged from the earliest article available until 31 July 2021. A total of 26 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 14 studies simulated complete edentation (CE), nine partial edentation (PE) and only two simulated a single implant (SI); One study simulated both CE and SI. In cases of PE and SI, most of the studies analyzed found greater accuracy with conventional impression (CI), although digital impression (DI) was also considered adequate. For CE the findings were inconclusive as six studies found greater accuracy with DI, five found better accuracy with CI and four found no differences. According to the results of this systematic review, DI is a valid alternative to CI for implants in PE and SI, although CI appear to be more accurate. For CE the findings were inconclusive, so more studies are needed before DI can be recommended for all implant-supported restorations.

Suggested Citation

  • María Isabel Albanchez-González & Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann & Jesús Peláez-Rico & Carlos López-Suárez & Verónica Rodríguez-Alonso & María Jesús Suárez-García, 2022. "Accuracy of Digital Dental Implants Impression Taking with Intraoral Scanners Compared with Conventional Impression Techniques: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2026-:d:747157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2026/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2026/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paulo Ribeiro & Mariano Herrero-Climent & Carmen Díaz-Castro & José Vicente Ríos-Santos & Roberto Padrós & Javier Gil Mur & Carlos Falcão, 2018. "Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions—An In Vitro Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Paolo Cappare & Gianpaolo Sannino & Margherita Minoli & Pietro Montemezzi & Francesco Ferrini, 2019. "Conventional versus Digital Impressions for Full Arch Screw-Retained Maxillary Rehabilitations: A Randomized Clinical Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maximiliane Amelie Schlenz & Victoria Schubert & Alexander Schmidt & Bernd Wöstmann & Sabine Ruf & Katharina Klaus, 2020. "Digital versus Conventional Impression Taking Focusing on Interdental Areas: A Clinical Trial," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Hang-Nga Mai & Jaeil Kim & Youn-Hee Choi & Du-Hyeong Lee, 2020. "Accuracy of Portable Face-Scanning Devices for Obtaining Three-Dimensional Face Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Simone Marques & Paulo Ribeiro & Carlos Falcão & Bernardo Ferreira Lemos & Blanca Ríos-Carrasco & José Vicente Ríos-Santos & Mariano Herrero-Climent, 2021. "Digital Impressions in Implant Dentistry: A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-20, January.
    4. Francesca Cattoni & Luca Chirico & Alberto Merlone & Michele Manacorda & Raffaele Vinci & Enrico Felice Gherlone, 2021. "Digital Smile Designed Computer-Aided Surgery versus Traditional Workflow in “All on Four” Rehabilitations: A Randomized Clinical Trial with 4-Years Follow-Up," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-18, March.
    5. José Vicente Ríos-Santos & Gregorio Tello-González & Pedro Lázaro-Calvo & Francisco Javier Gil Mur & Blanca Ríos-Carrasco & Ana Fernández-Palacín & Mariano Herrero-Climent, 2020. "One Abutment One Time: A Multicenter, Prospective, Controlled, Randomized Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Barbara Sobczak & Piotr Majewski, 2022. "An Integrated Fully Digital Prosthetic Workflow for the Immediate Full-Arch Restoration of Edentulous Patients—A Case Report," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-11, March.
    7. Luca Lavorgna & Gabriele Cervino & Luca Fiorillo & Giovanni Di Leo & Giuseppe Troiano & Marco Ortensi & Luigi Galantucci & Marco Cicciù, 2019. "Reliability of a Virtual Prosthodontic Project Realized through a 2D and 3D Photographic Acquisition: An Experimental Study on the Accuracy of Different Digital Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Roberto Lo Giudice & Fausto Famà, 2020. "Health Care and Health Service Digital Revolution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-2, July.
    9. Massimo Robiony & Elena Bocin & Salvatore Sembronio & Fabio Costa & Vittorio Bresadola & Alessandro Tel, 2020. "Redesigning the Paradigms of Clinical Practice for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery in the Era of Lockdown for COVID-19: From Tradition to Telesemeiology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-12, September.
    10. Se-Won Park & Ra Gyoung Yoon & Hyunwoo Lee & Heon-Jin Lee & Yong-Do Choi & Du-Hyeong Lee, 2020. "Impacts of Thresholds of Gray Value for Cone-Beam Computed Tomography 3D Reconstruction on the Accuracy of Image Matching with Optical Scan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-11, September.
    11. Naia Bustamante-Hernández & Jose María Montiel-Company & Carlos Bellot-Arcís & José Félix Mañes-Ferrer & María Fernanda Solá-Ruíz & Rubén Agustín-Panadero & Lucía Fernández-Estevan, 2020. "Clinical Behavior of Ceramic, Hybrid and Composite Onlays. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-23, October.
    12. Jaime Orejas-Perez & Beatriz Gimenez-Gonzalez & Ignacio Ortiz-Collado & Israel J. Thuissard & Andrea Santamaria-Laorden, 2022. "In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2026-:d:747157. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.