» Articles » PMID: 37754872

Accuracy of Computerized Optical Impression Making in Fabrication of Removable Dentures for Partially Edentulous Jaws: An In Vivo Feasibility Study

Overview
Date 2023 Sep 27
PMID 37754872
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The use of computerized optical impression making (COIM) for the fabrication of removable dentures for partially edentulous jaws is a rising trend in dental prosthetics. However, the accuracy of this method compared with that of traditional impression-making techniques remains uncertain. We therefore decided to evaluate the accuracy of COIM in the context of partially edentulous jaws in an in vivo setting. Twelve partially edentulous patients with different Kennedy classes underwent both a conventional impression (CI) and a computerized optical impression (COI) procedure. The CI was then digitized and compared with the COI data using 3D analysis software. Four different comparison situations were assessed: Whole Jaw (WJ), Mucosa with Residual Teeth (M_RT), Isolated Mucosa (IM), and Isolated Abutment Teeth (AT). Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate group differences by quantifying the deviation values between the CIs and COIs. The mean deviations between the COIs and CIs varied significantly across the different comparison situations, with mucosal areas showing higher deviations than dental hard tissue. However, no statistically significant difference was found between the maxilla and mandible. Although COIM offers a no-pressure impression method that captures surfaces without irritation, it was found to capture mucosa less accurately than dental hard tissue. This discrepancy can likely be attributed to software algorithms that automatically filter out mobile tissues. Clinically, these findings suggest that caution is required when using COIM for prosthetics involving mucosal tissues as deviations could compromise the fit and longevity of the prosthetic appliance. Further research is warranted to assess the clinical relevance of these deviations.

Citing Articles

Influence of different dental scenarios on the accuracy of computerized optical impressions: an in vitro pilot study.

Saravi B, Paffenholz C, Hazard D, Kohal R, Patzelt S Clin Oral Investig. 2025; 29(3):162.

PMID: 40016551 PMC: 11868131. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-025-06245-0.


The Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in Maxillary Defects with Different Model Variations.

Murat S, Batak B, Aydog O, Ozturk C Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(21).

PMID: 39518336 PMC: 11545352. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14212368.

References
1.
Reich S, Yatmaz B, Raith S . Do "cut out-rescan" procedures have an impact on the accuracy of intraoral digital scans?. J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 125(1):89-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.018. View

2.
Ender A, Mehl A . Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent. 2013; 16(1):11-21. View

3.
Camci H, Salmanpour F . Effect of saliva isolation and intraoral light levels on performance of intraoral scanners. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020; 158(5):759-766. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.03.022. View

4.
Joda T, Lenherr P, Dedem P, Kovaltschuk I, Bragger U, Zitzmann N . Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 28(10):1318-1323. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12982. View

5.
Cicciu M, Fiorillo L, DAmico C, Gambino D, Amantia E, Laino L . 3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review. Materials (Basel). 2020; 13(8). PMC: 7215909. DOI: 10.3390/ma13081982. View