2025 Volume 38 Issue 1 Pages 33-42
This study evaluated the implant position reproducibility of four intraoral scanners using a 3D analysis software. The effects of three scanning starting points on implant position reproducibility were compared.
To fabricate the master model, two implants were inserted into positions corresponding to teeth nos. 47 and 45 in a mandibular right free-end defect model (a model missing teeth nos. 47, 46, and 45). The master model was fitted with scan bodies to establish reference data. Optical impressions of the master model were obtained using four intraoral scanners：Element 5D (iTero, Align Technology), Lumina (iTero), Primescan (Dentsply Sirona), and IS 3800W (Envista Holdings Corp.). Scanning data were collected from each starting point corresponding to teeth nos. (1) 47, (2) 31, and (3) 37, with a unified scanning sequence in a counter-clockwise direction. A total of 60 scans were performed. The reference data and the data from each scanner were superimposed using the 3D analysis software to calculate and statistically analyze the concordance rates of the scan bodies. Lumina demonstrated the highest concordance rate across all starting points. However, no significant difference was observed between Element 5D and Lumina, or between Lumina and IS 3800W when scanning started from the point corresponding to tooth no. (1) 47, nor between Lumina and Primescan when scanning started from the point corresponding to tooth no. (2) 31.
In conclusion, Lumina exhibited the highest implant position reproducibility across all starting points. However, Element 5D, Primescan, and IS 3800W demonstrated concordance rates comparable to Lumina when the starting point was adjusted.
