Accuracy of impression-making methods in edentulous arches: An in vitro study encompassing conventional and digital methods

Abstract

Statement of problem: Studies evaluating the accuracy of edentulous arch impressions encompassing conventional and digital methods are lacking.

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate 8 impression-making methods for edentulous arches and to determine the effects of using a 3-dimensionally printed polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scanning aid on the accuracy of intraoral scanners.

Material and methods: Three sets of edentulous arch typodonts were scanned with an industrial scanner as a reference. Subsequently, a scanning aid for the edentulous arch was individually designed on each reference scan dataset by using a 3-dimensional modeling software program and fabricated in PEEK with a 3-dimensional printer. Each typodont was scanned with 2 intraoral scanners 12 times, with and without the assistance of a scanning aid for the edentulous arch. Impressions were made with 4 different conventional impression materials (irreversible hydrocolloid, polysulfide, polyether, and polyvinyl siloxane)-12 times for each typodont-the casts were poured and digitized with a tabletop scanner. Each scan data set was superimposed over the corresponding scan data set, and the original and absolute distance values from the paired surface points were obtained to measure the trueness and precision. These were expressed by using the mean, median, root mean square, and (90 percentile-10 percentile)/2 of the absolute distance value (NMT) concepts, based on the raw data extraction protocol. A repeated-measures ANOVA followed by a post hoc Bonferroni test was conducted (α=.05).

Results: The impression-making methods did not show statistically significant differences (P>.05) for either trueness or precision, particularly when the median values of the original and absolute distance values from the paired surface points were chosen as the standard values. One of the intraoral scanners used exhibited significantly superior outcomes to conventional impression materials when scanned with the scanning aid for the edentulous arch for both trueness and precision when the mean, root mean square, and NMT concepts were applied (P<.05).

Conclusions: Intraoral scanners demonstrated accuracy comparable with that of conventional impression materials for making edentulous arch impressions, regardless of the concepts used to express the trueness and precision. The PEEK-based scanning aid for the edentulous arch did not improve the accuracy of the intraoral scanners; however, its application resulted in higher accuracy compared with that of conventional impression materials.