Surface-Based Trueness and Precision of Five Intraoral Scanners in Implant-Supported Digital Scanning Scenarios Using RMS Analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
Accurate transfer of implant position is essential for implant-supported prosthodontic workflows. This in vitro study compared the trueness and precision of five intraoral scanners in single crown, three-unit fixed partial denture, and full-arch implant-supported scanning scenarios using root mean square (RMS) deviation analysis. Two maxillary resin models, representing partially dentulous and fully edentulous conditions, were fabricated through a CAD/CAM and 3D-printing workflow with implant analogs and scan bodies. Reference datasets were obtained with an InEos X5 desktop scanner, and each intraoral scanner was used to perform 10 scans per scenario. After standardized scenario-specific trimming, datasets were analyzed in Geomagic Control X. Statistical analysis included two-way analysis of variance and follow-up one-way analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc comparisons using Bonferroni-adjusted thresholds. Trueness was affected by scanner type (p < 0.001) and scenario (p < 0.001), without interaction (p = 0.096). Precision was affected by scanner type (p = 0.012), scenario (p = 0.004), and their interaction (p < 0.001). iTero Lumina and Helios 600 showed lower trueness deviations, whereas Trios 5 showed greater deviations, especially in full-arch scans. Scanner selection and scan extent should therefore be considered when interpreting surface-based RMS accuracy in implant-supported digital scans.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes · Dental materials and restorations · Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Cyprus Health and Social Sciences University, 99750 Morphou, Turkey
References (52)
Show source-provided references
1. Dental Implants: The Last 100 Years10.1016/j.joms.2017.08.045 ↗
2. Assessment of Impression Material Accuracy in Complete-Arch Restorations on Four Implants10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.10.017 ↗
3. Patient-centered Outcomes Comparing Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Procedures: A Randomized Crossover Trial10.1111/clr.12600 ↗
4. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review: Intraoral Digital Impression Review10.1111/jopr.12218 ↗
5. Evaluation of the Accuracy of 2 Digital Intraoral Scanners: A 3D Analysis Study10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.10.004 ↗
6. Digital Impressions Versus Conventional Impressions in Prosthodontics: A Systematic Review
7. Joda, T., Zarone, F., and Ferrari, M. (2017). The Complete Digital Workflow in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Systematic Review. BMC Oral Health, 17.10.1186/s12903-017-0415-0 ↗
8. Mangano, F.G., Admakin, O., Bonacina, M., Lerner, H., Rutkunas, V., and Mangano, C. (2020). Trueness of 12 Intraoral Scanners in the Full-Arch Implant Impression: A Comparative in Vitro Study. BMC Oral Health, 20.10.1186/s12903-020-01254-9 ↗
9. Schmidt, A., Schlenz, M.A., Liu, H., Kämpe, H.S., and Wöstmann, B. (2021). The Influence of Hard- and Software Improvement of Intraoral Scanners on the Implant Transfer Accuracy from 2012 to 2021: An In Vitro Study. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11157166 ↗
10. Accuracy Evaluation of Two Different Intraoral Scanners in Implant Prosthodontics. A Comparative In Vitro Study
11. Guide to Optimizing the Accuracy of Intraoral Implant Scans: A Review Article10.4274/cjms.2024.2024-31 ↗
12. Alkadi, L. (2023). A Comprehensive Review of Factors That Influence the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners. Diagnostics, 13.10.3390/diagnostics13213291 ↗
13. (2023). Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results Part 1: General Principles and Definitions (Standard No. ISO 5725-1:2023).
14. Evaluation of the Accuracy of 7 Digital Scanners: An in Vitro Analysis Based on 3-Dimensional Comparisons10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.024 ↗
15. A Guide for Maximizing the Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Scans. Part 1: Operator Factors10.1111/jerd.12985 ↗
16. Accuracy of Digital Impressions at Varying Implant Depths: An In Vitro Study10.1111/jopr.13496 ↗
17. A Guide for Maximizing the Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Scans: Part 2—Patient Factors10.1111/jerd.12993 ↗
18. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Seven Intraoral Scanners for the Full Dentate and Partially Edentulous Complete-Arch Mandibular Casts: An in Vitro Comparison10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31063 ↗
19. Comparison of Accuracy of Current Ten Intraoral Scanners10.1155/2021/2673040 ↗
20. El-Refay, H.M., Abdelaziz, M.S., Cheta, N.M., and Abdallah, M.F. (2025). The Accuracy of Digital Impression with Different Intraoral Scanners on Maxillary All on Four Implants: An in Vitro Study. BMC Res. Notes, 18.10.1186/s13104-025-07235-x ↗
21. Mangano, F.G., Hauschild, U., Veronesi, G., Imburgia, M., Mangano, C., and Admakin, O. (2019). Trueness and Precision of 5 Intraoral Scanners in the Impressions of Single and Multiple Implants: A Comparative in Vitro Study. BMC Oral Health, 19.10.1186/s12903-019-0792-7 ↗
22. Lim, J.-H., Mangal, U., Nam, N.-E., Choi, S.-H., Shim, J.-S., and Kim, J.-E. (2021). A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14082060 ↗
23. The Effect Different Substrates Have on the Trueness and Precision of Eight Different Intraoral Scanners10.1111/jerd.12528 ↗
24. Accuracy of Single Implant Scans with a Combined Healing Abutment-Scan Body System and Different Intraoral Scanners: An in Vitro Study10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103773 ↗
25. Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners in Full-Arch Scans
26. Dimensional Accuracy of Extrusion- and Photopolymerization-Based 3D Printers: In Vitro Study Comparing Printed Casts10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.011 ↗
27. A Comparison of Trueness and Precision of 12 3D Printers Used in Dentistry10.1038/s41405-022-00108-6 ↗
28. Czajkowska, M., Walejewska, E., Zadrożny, Ł., Wieczorek, M., Święszkowski, W., Wagner, L., Mijiritsky, E., and Markowski, J. (2020). Comparison of Dental Stone Models and Their 3D Printed Acrylic Replicas for the Accuracy and Mechanical Properties. Materials, 13.10.3390/ma13184066 ↗
29. Comparison of 3D Positional Accuracy of Implant Analogs in Printed Resin Models versus Conventional Stone Casts: Effect of Implant Angulation10.1111/jopr.13647 ↗
30. Accuracy of Intraoral Photogrammetry versus Direct Digital Implant Impressions in the Fully Edentulous Lower Jaw: An in Vitro Study10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105654 ↗
31. Nulty, A.B. (2021). A Comparison of Full Arch Trueness and Precision of Nine Intra-Oral Digital Scanners and Four Lab Digital Scanners. Dent. J., 9.10.20944/preprints202105.0165.v1 ↗
32. Accuracy, Precision, and Efficiency of Three-Dimensional (3D) Dental Lab Scanners: A Comparative Study of Two Systems10.2174/18742106-v16-e221020-2022-33 ↗
33. Influence of Scanning Pattern on Accuracy, Time, and Number of Photograms of Complete-Arch Implant Scans: A Clinical Study10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105310 ↗
34. Influence of the Scanning Path on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in the Implanted Edentulous Patient: An in Vitro Study
35. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in Different Complete Arch Scan Patterns10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.12.026 ↗
36. Gavounelis, N.A., Gogola, C.-M.C., and Halazonetis, D.J. (2022). The Effect of Scanning Strategy on Intraoral Scanner’s Accuracy. Dent. J., 10.10.3390/dj10070123 ↗
37. (2015). Digitizing Devices for CAD/CAM Systems for Indirect Dental Restorations—Test Methods for Assessing Accuracy (Standard No. ISO 12836:2015).
38. Influence of Scanner Precision and Analysis Software in Quantifying Three-Dimensional Intraoral Changes: Two-Factor Factorial Experimental Design10.2196/17150 ↗
39. Negm, E.E., Patel, M., and Ryan, P. (2024). Impact of the Superimposition Reference Area on Intraoral Scanning Accuracy in a Partially Dentate Maxilla. J. Prosthet. Dent., 132.10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.03.018 ↗
40. Critical Methodological Factors Influencing the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in Digital Dentistry Research10.1016/j.compbiomed.2025.109780 ↗
41. Accuracy of Impressions for Multiple Implants: A Comparative Study of Digital and Conventional Techniques10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.01.016 ↗
42. Influence of Scan Technology on the Accuracy and Speed of Intraoral Scanning Systems for the Edentulous Maxilla: An in Vitro Study10.1111/jopr.13633 ↗
43. Scan Accuracy of Recently Introduced Wireless Intraoral Scanners in Different Fixed Partial Denture Situations10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105558 ↗
44. Trueness of 3Shape Trios 5 on Full Arch Implant Impressions10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105156 ↗
45. Update on the Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions in 2023: A Coordinate-Based Analysis
46. Pesce, P., Bagnasco, F., Pancini, N., Colombo, M., Canullo, L., Pera, F., Bressan, E., Annunziata, M., and Menini, M. (2021). Trueness of Intraoral Scanners in Implant-Supported Rehabilitations: An In Vitro Analysis on the Effect of Operators’ Experience and Implant Number. J. Clin. Med., 10.10.3390/jcm10245917 ↗
47. Evaluating the Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners Used in Single-Unit Implant Prosthesis Construction10.5577/idr.2023.vol13.s1.5 ↗
48. Comparison of 3D Accuracy of Three Different Digital Intraoral Scanners in Full-Arch Implant Impressions10.4047/jap.2023.15.4.179 ↗
49. Classification of Scanning Errors of Digital Scans Recorded by Using Intraoral Scanners10.1111/jerd.13419 ↗
50. A Comparison of the Precision of Three-Dimensional Images Acquired by 2 Digital Intraoral Scanners: Effects of Tooth Irregularity and Scanning Direction10.4041/kjod.2016.46.1.3 ↗
51. Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions Obtained Using Intraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of in Vivo Studies10.1186/s40729-023-00517-8 ↗
52. D’haese, R., Vrombaut, T., Roeykens, H., and Vandeweghe, S. (2022). In Vitro Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Impressions for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Prostheses. J. Clin. Med., 11.10.3390/jcm11030594 ↗