Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
189,280 studies31 sourcesUpdated 13 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYInternational Dental Journal

Comparative Evaluation of Trueness of Three Intraoral Scanner Technologies in Edentulous Maxillary Ridges

  • Meghan Ranjan Singh1
  • Subhabrata Maiti1
  • Jessy Paulraj2
  • Mario Alberto Alarcón-Sánchez
  • Cosimo Galletti3
  • Seyed Ali Mosaddad4
  • Artak Heboyan5
5 affiliations
  1. 1Department of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
  2. 2Department of Pedodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India
  3. 3Faculty of Medicine and Surgery , Kore University of Enna, Enna, Italy
  4. 4Department of Research Analytics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India; Department of Conservative Dentistry and Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain; Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
  5. 5Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Stomatology, Yerevan State Medical University after Mkhitar Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia
Read full textPDFDOICite

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the trueness of three intraoral scanner (IOS) technologies – Confocal/Wavefront sampling system (3Shape TRIOS), Active triangulation (Medit i700), and Smart Pixel Sensor/Dynamic depth scanning (Primescan) – in capturing maxillary edentulous ridges with varied anatomical characteristics. Materials and methods: A crossover clinical trial was conducted with 24 fully edentulous maxillary patients. A standardized four-swipe scanning pathway was used, a reference master cast created from polyvinyl siloxane impressions and digitized with a laboratory scanner, and intraoral scans using the three IOS devices in randomized order. Trueness was evaluated by comparing IOS scans to the reference using superimposition technique in Geomagic Control X software. Statistical analysis included multifactorial repeated-measures analysis of variance, with 95% confidence intervals and adjusted pairwise comparisons. Results: Scanner type significantly affected root mean square (RMS) deviation ( P < .001), with Medit i700 showing higher deviations than 3Shape TRIOS and Primescan. Arch form also significantly influenced RMS deviation ( P < .001), with V-shaped arches showing greater deviations, while palatal vault height showed a borderline effect ( P = .050). A significant scanner × arch-form interaction was observed ( P < .001). Conclusion: Scanner type and maxillary arch form significantly influenced scan trueness in fully edentulous maxillary arches, whereas palatal vault height showed a limited effect. Under the standardized scanning protocol, 3Shape TRIOS and Primescan demonstrated lower RMS deviations than Medit i700. Clinical relevance: Scanner technology significantly influences the accuracy of digital impressions in edentulous maxillary arches. Selecting highly accurate scanners may improve the predictability of complete denture fabrication.

Related

  1. Evaluation of the Position of Impacted Maxillary Canines on Panoramic Radiographs Using Deep Learning with CBCT as the Reference Standard
    Anıl Demirel, Sabahattin Bor, Fırat Oğuz +1
    Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  2. Preliminary Clinical Case Series for Evaluation of a Novel Bi-Dimensional Archwire During Miniscrew-Supported En-Masse Retraction of the Maxillary Anterior Teeth.
    Abdulmalek M H Almasri, Mohammad Y Hajeer, Ahmad S Burhan +1
    Reports (MDPI)Peer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  3. Application of spectroscopic and multispectral imaging technologies on the assessment of ready-to-eat pineapple quality: A performance evaluation study of machine learning models generated from two commercial data analytics tools
    Evanthia Manthou, Sergio-Llaneza Lago, Evaggelos Dagres +5
    Computers and Electronics in AgriculturePeer-reviewedLicence not stated38 citedGeneral biologyGeneral chemistryHAL
  4. Comparative efficacy of different digital technologies in adults with insomnia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Xinyu Wang, Yong Zhao, Li Wang +5
    Frontiers in PsychiatryPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Psychiatry & mental healthCrossref
  5. Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Health Technologies for Improved Healthcare Access: Design and Pilot Evaluation of an Integrated Digital Health Platform for a Nigerian Teaching Hospital
    O. E. Ochem, O. P. Ezego
    medRxivPreprintCC BYFull textEpidemiology & public healthmedRxiv

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{singh2026comparative,
  title = {{Comparative Evaluation of Trueness of Three Intraoral Scanner Technologies in Edentulous Maxillary Ridges}},
  author = {Meghan Ranjan Singh and Subhabrata Maiti and Jessy Paulraj and Mario Alberto Alarcón-Sánchez and Cosimo Galletti and Seyed Ali Mosaddad and Artak Heboyan},
  journal = {International Dental Journal},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1016/j.identj.2026.111258},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2026.111258},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Comparative Evaluation of Trueness of Three Intraoral Scanner Technologies in Edentulous Maxillary Ridges
AU  - Meghan Ranjan Singh
AU  - Subhabrata Maiti
AU  - Jessy Paulraj
AU  - Mario Alberto Alarcón-Sánchez
AU  - Cosimo Galletti
AU  - Seyed Ali Mosaddad
AU  - Artak Heboyan
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/30
JO  - International Dental Journal
DO  - 10.1016/j.identj.2026.111258
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2026.111258
AB  - Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the trueness of three intraoral scanner (IOS) technologies – Confocal/Wavefront sampling system (3Shape TRIOS), Active triangulation (Medit i700), and Smart Pixel Sensor/Dynamic depth scanning (Primescan) – in capturing maxillary edentulous ridges with varied anatomical characteristics. Materials and methods: A crossover clinical trial was conducted with 24 fully edentulous maxillary patients. A standardized four-swipe scanning pathway was used, a reference master cast created from polyvinyl siloxane impressions and digitized with a laboratory scanner, and intraoral scans using the three IOS devices in randomized order. Trueness was evaluated by comparing IOS scans to the reference using superimposition technique in Geomagic Control X software. Statistical analysis included multifactorial repeated-measures analysis of variance, with 95% confidence intervals and adjusted pairwise comparisons. Results: Scanner type significantly affected root mean square (RMS) deviation ( P < .001), with Medit i700 showing higher deviations than 3Shape TRIOS and Primescan. Arch form also significantly influenced RMS deviation ( P < .001), with V-shaped arches showing greater deviations, while palatal vault height showed a borderline effect ( P = .050). A significant scanner × arch-form interaction was observed ( P < .001). Conclusion: Scanner type and maxillary arch form significantly influenced scan trueness in fully edentulous maxillary arches, whereas palatal vault height showed a limited effect. Under the standardized scanning protocol, 3Shape TRIOS and Primescan demonstrated lower RMS deviations than Medit i700. Clinical relevance: Scanner technology significantly influences the accuracy of digital impressions in edentulous maxillary arches. Selecting highly accurate scanners may improve the predictability of complete denture fabrication.
SN  - 0020-6539
SN  - 1875-595X
ER  -