In vitro comparison of the accuracy (precision and trueness) of eight dental scanners for dental bridge scanning

Abstract

Background: Dental scanners play a critical role in computer‑aided design/computer‑aided
manufacturing technology. This study aimed to compare the accuracy (precision and trueness) of
eight dental scanners for dental bridge scanning.
Materials and Methods: In this in‑vitro experimental study, a typodont model with a missing
maxillary right first molar was prepared for a 3‑unit fixed partial denture. Each scanner
(Sirona inEos inLab, Sirona X5, Dentium, Imes icore 350I I3D, Amann Girrbach map 100, 3Shape
D100, 3Shape E3) performed seven scans of the typodont, and the data were analyzed using 3D‑Tool
software. The abutment length, abutment width, arch length, and interdental distance were measured.
To assess the accuracy of each scanner, trueness was evaluated by superimposing the scanned data
on true values obtained by the 3shape Triosscanner as the reference. Precision was evaluated by
superimposing a pair of data sets obtained from the same scanner. Precision and trueness of the
scanners were compared using the one‑way ANOVA followed by the post‑hoc Tukey’s HSD test and one‑sample t‑test (P<0.05 was considerer significant)
Results: The precision of scanners ranged from 14 μm (3Shape Trios) to 45 μm (Imes icore 350i),
whereas the trueness ranged from 38 μm (3Shape d700) to 71 μm (Sirona X5).
Conclusion: The reported trueness values for 3Shape Trios, Sirona inEos inLab, Sirona x5, Dentium,
Imes icore350i, Amann Girrbach, 3Shape d700, and 3Shape e3 were 63, 45, 71, 67, 70, 53, 38, and
42 μm, respectively, whereas the precision values were 14, 29, 44, 34, 45, 44, 30 and 28 μm, respectively.
Key Words: Accuracy, dental scanner, precision, trueness