COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN INTRAORAL SCANNERS AND EXTRAORAL SCANNER: EVALUATION OF CLINICAL ASPECTS AND PRECISION

A. Hernandez Perez and M. Rumpianesi*

Postgraduate School of Orthodontics, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Correspondence to:
Martina Rumpianesi, DDS,
Postgraduate School of Orthodontics,
University of Ferrara,
Via Luigi Borsari 46,
44121 Ferrara, Italy.
e-mail: martina.rumpianesi@gmail.com

Received: 29 January 2020 Accepted: 15 March 2020Biolife-Publisher.it © 2020

ISSN: 2038-4106 This publication and/or article is for individual use only and may not be further reproduced without written permission from the copyright holder. Unauthorized reproduction may result in financial and other penalties. Disclosure: All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

ABSTRACT

Nowadays, digital technology is part of our daily clinical practice. Digital models have some advantages compared to traditional plaster models, and they can be obtained with intraoral and extraoral scanners. The aim of this study is to compare four types of scanners, three of which are intraoral (3Shape Trios, 3M True Definition, Carestream CS3500), and one is extraoral (ZFX Evolution). Digital dental impressions were taken to 8 patients with every intraoral scanner tested, and a scan of traditional models was performed with the extraoral scanner to create digital models. After each scan, the time required was calculated, and the patient and the operator answered a questionnaire. Six linear measurements were detected in every digital model to investigate the scanner’s accuracy, both in the upper and lower arch. The scanners have good reliability, showing no significant differences between the first and the second measurements taken by the operator (with a distance of 7 days between them). The scanners tested are very accurate since there are no significative statistical differences between the measurement, except for one parameter (distance between the lower canine and the lower first molar on the right side). The Trios scanner has a reduced scan time, followed by the True Definition. Based on the questionnaires, patients prefer the 3Shape Trios in terms of ergonomics, versatility and ease of use, while the operators prefer the 3M True Definition, thanks to its lightness, speed and versatility. The digital models obtained with the three intraoral scanners tested are all good and accurate, but there are differences in comfort and scan time.

KEYWORDS: Intraoral, scanner, extraoral scanner, digital model