PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of direct digital impressions in vivo and compare it to that of conventional impressions in order to assess whether intraoral scanners could be a legitimate alternative for the manufacturing of fixed prosthodontics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases using query terms such as digital impression; intraoral digital impression; intraoral scanner; intraoral digital scanner; conventional impression; analogue impression; and accuracy. The outcomes were the trueness and precision of digital impressions in comparison to those of high-precision conventional impressions in vivo. RESULTS: Six studies matched the inclusion criteria. Four studies investigated the precision of digital impressions, while two studies focused on their trueness. Even if all the authors agreed that conventional impressions were more accurate than digital impressions in vivo, they gave different opinions on using intraoral scanners in a clinical context without causing misfit of the final restoration. CONCLUSION: According to the results of the present review, conventional impressions performed using high-precision impression materials showed greater accuracy than digital impressions. However, additional studies assessing the accuracy of digital impressions in a wider variety of clinical situations are highly recommended.

Accuracy of Digital Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies / Giachetti L.; Sarti C.; Cinelli F.; Scaminaci Russo D.. - In: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS. - ISSN 0893-2174. - STAMPA. - 33:(2020), pp. 192-201. [10.11607/ijp.6468]

Accuracy of Digital Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies

Giachetti L.;Scaminaci Russo D.
2020

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of direct digital impressions in vivo and compare it to that of conventional impressions in order to assess whether intraoral scanners could be a legitimate alternative for the manufacturing of fixed prosthodontics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic systematic search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases using query terms such as digital impression; intraoral digital impression; intraoral scanner; intraoral digital scanner; conventional impression; analogue impression; and accuracy. The outcomes were the trueness and precision of digital impressions in comparison to those of high-precision conventional impressions in vivo. RESULTS: Six studies matched the inclusion criteria. Four studies investigated the precision of digital impressions, while two studies focused on their trueness. Even if all the authors agreed that conventional impressions were more accurate than digital impressions in vivo, they gave different opinions on using intraoral scanners in a clinical context without causing misfit of the final restoration. CONCLUSION: According to the results of the present review, conventional impressions performed using high-precision impression materials showed greater accuracy than digital impressions. However, additional studies assessing the accuracy of digital impressions in a wider variety of clinical situations are highly recommended.
2020
33
192
201
Goal 3: Good health and well-being for people
Giachetti L.; Sarti C.; Cinelli F.; Scaminaci Russo D.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Accuracy of Digital Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics- A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.pdf

Accesso chiuso

Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Version of record)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione 277.61 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
277.61 kB Adobe PDF   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/1186472
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 66
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 52
social impact