雜誌專訪

[北市牙期刊] 牙科數位⼜掃機臨床應⽤及評比

Intra-Oral Scanners (IOS)
Clinical Applications And Comparison


Intraoral scanners (IOS) 數位⼜內掃瞄機(以下簡稱⼜掃機)︔以直接擷取病⼈⼜內⽴即光學影像代替傳統印模材料取模︔在牙科學術及產業界掀起一股新勢⼒。
相同於其他產業上使⽤的三維掃描儀 (Three-dimensional (3D) scanners),⼜掃機會發射出一穩定光源,照射到待掃描物件上,再接收反射的光源,以軟體程式重組出待掃描影像,以達到相同於印模的⽬的。
⼜掃機光源的種類︔和光源照射的⽅式有許多差異︔以光源來說可能是較早期發展的雷射光 (Laser)︔或是較近期較先進之結構光 (Structure light)︔⽽光源照射⽅式則分為單點式 (Point)(Fig.1)、線型狀(Line)網狀式(Mesh)(Fig.2)、抑或是連續錄影⽅式(Continuous video data Capture )發射出光源再接受反射形成影像。
待掃描物件可能是上下全⼜牙弓的研究模型 (Study casts),已修磨過的⽀台齒(Abutment teeth),甚至是植牙的implant scan body等,經由⼜掃的步驟擷取包含牙冠及牙齦等數位訊息,將全部匯入⼜掃機搭配⽀援的軟體,以複雜的運算程式重組出精確的影像。
影像建⽴完成後再根據⽀援軟體的處理強度及完整性,軟體可以提供⽣產出待備置模型,⼯作模型,甚至直接數位⽣產出牙科使⽤的強化陶瓷補綴物。所有製作流程全程數位化,取代傳統印模後以⽯膏 (Plaster)或強化⽯膏模材(Dental stone)灌出的模型。
根據影像呈現⽅式,及軟體處理數據功能平台架構和細膩度不同,⼜掃機功能涵蓋範圍及其精準度等級就有非常⼤的差別。

本篇⽂章及其續篇將會以⼜掃成像和傳統印模,以實證醫學的角度針對其優缺點做分析︔並提供臨床醫師病例選擇上的篩選依據︔再將市⾯上不同⼜掃機品牌,針對其影像成像、軟體應⽤性、功能差異、及其優缺點等,做一詳細評比介紹,希望提供臨床牙醫師在初出踏入牙科數位化的過程中,能對⼜掃機有一定程度的瞭解。










 
Reference:
 
1. Ting-Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review. J Prosthodont. 2015;24(4):313–21.

2. Zimmermann M, Mehl A, Mörmann WH, Reich S. Intraoral scanning systems - a current overview. Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(2):101–29.

3. Martin CB, Chalmers EV, McIntyre GT, Cochrane H, Mossey PA. Orthodontic scanners: what's available? J Orthod. 2015;42(2):136–43.

4. Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):92.

5. Aragón ML, Pontes LF, Bichara LM, Flores-Mir C, Normando D. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(4):429–34.

6. Goracci C, Franchi L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(4):422–8.

7. Ahlholm P, Sipilä K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review. J Prosthodont 2016 Aug 2. doi: 10.1111/ jopr.12527. [Epub ahead of print] Review.

8. Chochlidakis KM, Papaspyridakos P, Geminiani A, Chen CJ, Feng IJ, Ercoli C. Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta- analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116 (2): 184–190.e12.

9. Means CR, Flenniken IE. Gagging–a problem in prosthetic dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 1970;23(6):614–20.

10. Rosted P, Bundgaard M, Fiske J, Pedersen AM. The use of acupuncture in controlling the gag reflex in patients requiring an upper alginate impression: an audit. Br Dent J. 2006;201(11):721–5.

11. Muir JD, Calvert EJ. Vomiting during the taking of dental impressions. Two case reports of the use of psychological techniques. Br Dent J. 1988;165(4): 139–41.

12. Christensen GJ GJ. Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139(6):761–3.

13. Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health. 2014;14:10.

14. Joda T, Brägger U. Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(12):e185–9.

15. Burhardt L, Livas C, Kerdijk W, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Treatment comfort, time perception, and preference for conventional and digital impression techniques: A comparative study in young patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2016;150(2):261–7.

16. Grünheid T, McCarthy SD, Larson BE. Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014;146(5):673–82.

17. Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA. Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(10):1113–8.

18. Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Kerdijk W, Cune MS. Digital versus analog complete arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: Operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):403–6.

19. Sakornwimon N, Leevailoj C. Clinical marginal fit of zirconia crowns and patients' preferences for impression techniques using intraoral digital scanner versus polyvinyl siloxane material. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Feb 17. pii: S0022–3913(16)30598–4. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.019.
[Epub ahead of print].

20. Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(1):111–5.

21. Joda T, Bragger U. Time-efficiency analysis comparing digital and conventional workflows for implant crowns: a prospective clinical crossover trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(5):1047–53.

22. Joda T, Bragger U. Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(12):1430–5.

23. Patzelt SB, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, Att W. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(6):542–51.

24. Joda T, Lenherr P, Dedem P, Kovaltschuk I, Bragger U, Zitzmann NU. Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016 Sep 5. doi: 10.1111/clr.12982. [Epub ahead of print].

25. Kugel G. Impression-taking: conventional methods remain steadfast as digital technology progresses. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2014;35(3):202–3.

26. Lawson NC, Burgess JO. Clinicians reaping benefits of new concepts in impressioning. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015;36(2):152–3.

27. Lecocq G. Digital impression-taking: Fundamentals and benefits in orthodontics. Int Orthod. 2016;14(2):184–94.

28. Park HR, Park JM, Chun YS, Lee KN, Kim M. Changes in views on digital intraoral scanners among dental hygienists after training in digital impression taking. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15(1):151.

29. Lee SJ, Macarthur RX 4th, Gallucci GO. An evaluation of student and clinician
perception of digital and conventional implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 110 (5): 420–423.

30. Marti AM, Harris BT, Metz MJ, Morton D, Scarfe WC, Metz CJ, Lin WS. Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by dental students: instructional efficiency and attitudes towards technology. Eur J Dent Educ. 2017;21(3): 200–5.

31.  31. Kim J, Park JM, Kim M, Heo SJ, Shin IH, Kim M. Comparison of experience curves between two 3- dimensional intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116(2):221–30.

32. Lim JH, Park JM, Kim M, Heo SJ, Myung JY. Comparison of digital intraoral scanner reproducibility and image trueness considering repetitive experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jul 7. pii: S0022–3913(17)30350–5. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.05.002.
[Epub ahead of print].

33. Mandelli F, Ferrini F, Gastaldi G, Gherlone E, Ferrari M. Improvement of a Digital Impression with Conventional Materials: Overcoming Intraoral Scanner Limitations. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(4):373–6.

34. Agnini A, Agnini A, Coachman C. The Digital Revolution: The Learning Curve. 1st edition, Quintessence Publishing, 2015.

35. Ender A, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(3):313–20.

36. Ender A, Zimmermann M, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(7):1495–504.
 
37. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2): 121–8.
 
38. Zhang F, Suh KJ, Lee KM. Validity of Intraoral Scans Compared with Plaster Models: An In-Vivo Comparison of Dental Measurements and 3D Surface Analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0157713.
 
39. Amin S, Weber HP, Finkelman M, El Rafie K, Kudara Y, Papaspyridakos P. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016 Dec 31. doi: 10.1111/clr.12994.
[Epub ahead of print].
 
40. Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2013;144(3):471–8.
 
41. Guth JF, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Invest. 2013;17(4):1201–8.
 
42. Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: An in-vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2015;59(4): 236–42.
 
43. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(7):1759–64.
 
44. Gjelvold B, Chrcanovic BR, Korduner EK, Collin-Bagewitz I, Kisch J. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique Compared to Conventional Impression Technique. A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Prosthod. 2016; 25(4):282–7.
 
45. Serag M, Nassar TA, Avondoglio D, Weiner S. A Comparative Study of the Accuracy of Dies Made from Digital Intraoral Scanning vs. Elastic Impressions: An In Vitro Study. J Prosthodont 2016 May 5. doi: 10.1111/jopr. 12481. [Epub ahead of print].
 
46. Rhee YK, Huh YH, Cho LR, Park CJ. Comparison of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques using 3- dimensional superimposition. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015;7(6):460–7.
 
47. Ajioka H, Kihara H, Odaira C, Kobayashi T, Kondo H. Examination of the Position Accuracy of Implant Abutments Reproduced by Intra-Oral Optical Impression. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0164048.
 
48. Wesemann C, Muallah J, Mah J, Bumann A. Accuracy and efficiency of full- arch digitalization and 3D printing: A comparison between desktop model scanners, an intraoral scanner, a CBCT model scan, and stereolithographic 3D printing. Quintessence Int. 2017;48(1):41–50.
 
49. Muallah J, Wesemann C, Nowak R, Robben J, Mah J, Pospiech P, Bumann A. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral and extraoral scanners: an in vitro study using a new method of evaluation. Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(2): 151–64.
 
50. Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, Lauer A. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3 dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(1):36–42.
 
51. Fukazawa S, Odaira C, Kondo H. Investigation of accuracy and reproducibility of abutment position by intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res. 2017 Feb 16. pii: S1883–1958(17)30014–2. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2017.01. 005. [Epub ahead of print].
 
52. Güth JF, Runkel C, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Keul C. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(5):1445–55.
 
53. Park JM. Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8(5):354–62.
 
54. Mangano FG, Veronesi G, Hauschild U, Mijiritsky E, Mangano C. Trueness and Precision of Four Intraoral Scanners in Oral Implantology: A Comparative in Vitro Study. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0163107.
 
55. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1461–71.
 
56. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(6):1687–94.
 
57. Patzelt SB, Vonau S, Stampf S, Att W. Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013;144(8):914–20.

58. van der Meer WJ, Andriessen FS, Wismeijer D, Ren Y. Application of intra- oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e43312.

59. Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16(1):11–21.
 
60. Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2016; 46 (1): 3–12.

61. Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. Quintessence Int. 2016;47(4):343–9.
 
62. Zaruba M, Mehl A. Chairside systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(2):123–49.

63. Prudente MS, Davi LR, Nabbout KO, Prado CJ, Pereira LM, Zancopé K, Neves FD. Influence of scanner, powder application, and adjustments on CAD- CAM crown misfit. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jul 7. pii: S0022–3913(17)30280– 9. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.03.024. [Epub ahead of print].
 
64. Camardella LT, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements on plaster models and digital models created using an intraoral scanner. J Orofac Orthop. 2017;78(3):211–20.

65. Karaokutan I, Yilmaz Savas T, Aykent F, Ozdere E. Color Stability of CAD/CAM Fabricated Inlays after Accelerated Artificial Aging. J Prosthodont. 2016;25(6): 472–7.

66. da Costa JB, Pelogia F, Hagedorn B, Ferracane JL. Evaluation of different methods of optical impression making on the marginal gap of onlays created with CEREC 3D. Oper Dent. 2010;35(3):324–9.

67. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1171–5.
 
68. Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of single- tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig. 2015;19(8):2027–34.

69. Benic GI, Mühlemann S, Fehmer V, Hämmerle CH, Sailer I. Randomized controlled within-subject evaluation of digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of lithium disilicate single crowns. Part I: digital versus conventional unilateral impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(5):777–82.

70. Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(4):554–9.
 
71. Kim JH, Jeong JH, Lee JH, Cho HW. Fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated from conventional and digital impressions assessed with micro-CT. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(4):551–7.
 
72. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry I, Thomas GW, Qian F. 3D and 2D marginal fit of pressed and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(8):610–7.
 
73. Anadioti E, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Holloway JA, Denry IL, Thomas GW, Qian F. Internal fit of pressed and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing ceramic crowns made from digital and conventional impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113(4):304–9.
 
74. Ng J, Ruse D, Wyatt CA. Comparison of the marginal fit of crowns fabricated with digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(3):555–60.

75. Rodiger M, Heinitz A, Burgers R, Rinke S. Fitting accuracy of zirconia single crowns produced via digital and conventional impressions-a clinical comparative study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(2):579–87.
 
76. Gherlone E, Mandelli F, Capparè P, Pantaleo G, Traini T, Ferrini F. A 3 years retrospective study of survival for zirconia- based single crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions. J Dent. 2014;42(9):1151–5.
 
77. Berrendero S, Salido MP, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Pradíes G. Influence of conventional and digital intraoral impressions on the fit of CAD/CAM- fabricated all-ceramic crowns. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(9):2403–10.
 
78. Tamim H, Skjerven H, Ekfeldt A, Rønold HJ. Clinical evaluation of CAD/CAM metal-ceramic posterior crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions. Int J Prosthodont. 2014;27(4):331–7.
 
79. Zarauz C, Valverde A, Martinez-Rus F, Hassan B, Pradies G. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(4):799–806.
 
80. Vennerstrom M, Fakhary M, Von Steyern PV. The fit of crowns produced using digital impression systems. Swed Dent J. 2014;38(3):101–10.
 
81. Pradíes G, Zarauz C, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Martínez-Rus F. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology. J Dent. 2015;43(2):201–8.
 
82. Shembesh M, Ali A, Finkelman M, Weber HP, Zandparsa R. An in vitro comparison of the marginal adaptation accuracy of CAD/CAM restorations using different impression systems. J Prosthodont 2016 Feb 8. doi: 10.1111/ jopr.12446. [Epub ahead of print].
 
83. Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(2):291–300.
 
84. TS S, Sun J. Comparison of marginal and internal fit of 3-unit ceramic fixed dental prostheses made with either a conventional or digital impression. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(3):362–7.
 
85. Selz CF, Bogler J, Vach K, Strub JR, Guess PC. Veneered anatomically designed zirconia FDPs resulting from digital intraoral scans: preliminary results of a prospective clinical study. J Dent. 2015;43(12):1428–35.
 
86. Ueda K, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Erdelt K, Keul C, Güth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs from CoCr and zirconia after conventional and digital impressions. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(2):283–9.
 
87. Silva JS A e, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araújo É, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Güth JF. Marginal and internal fit of four-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses based on digital and conventional impression techniques. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(2): 515–23.
 
88. Tsirogiannis P, Reissmann DR, Heydecke G. Evaluation of the marginal fit of single-unit, complete-coverage ceramic restorations fabricated after digital and conventional impressions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;16(3):328–35.
 
89. Flügge TV, Att W, Metzger MC, Nelson K. Precision of dental implant digitization using intraoral scanners. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29(3):277–83.
 
90. Joda T, Wittneben JG, Brägger U. Digital implant impressions with the "individualized Scanbody technique" for emergence profile support. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(3):395–7.
 
91. Joda T, Bragger U. Complete digital workflow for the production of implant- supported single-unit monolithic crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25(11):1304–6.
 
92. Joda T. Time-dependent supraimplant mucosa changes: short communication. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(3):619–21.
 
93. Schnitman PA, Han RK. Completely digital two-visit immediately loaded implants: proof of concept. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41(4):429–36.
 
94. Aktas G, Özcan N, Aydin DH, Şahin E, Akça K. Effect of digitizing techniques on the fit of implant-retained crowns with different antirotational abutment features. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111(5):367–72.
 
95. Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S, Ozan O, Ozcelik TB, Yagiz A. Digital evaluation of the accuracy of impression techniques and materials in angulated implants. J Dent. 2014;42(12):1551–9.
 
96. Hinds KF. Intraoral digital impressions to enhance implant esthetics. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2014;35(3 Suppl):25– 33.
 
97. Beuer F, Groesser J, Schweiger J, Hey J, Güth JF, Stimmelmayr M. The digital one-abutment/one-time concept. A clinical report. J Prosthodont 2015 Jan 5. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12256. [Epub ahead of print].
 
98. Wilk BL. Intraoral digital Impressioning for dental implant restorations versus traditional implant impression techniques. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015; 36 (7): 529–530, 532–533.
 
99. Nayyar N, Yilmaz B, Glumphy E. Using digitally coded healing abutments and an intraoral scanner to fabricate implant-supported, cement-retained restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(4):210–5.
 
100. Stoetzer M, Wagner ME, Wenzel D, Lindhorts D, Gellrich NC, von See C. Non- radiological method for 3-dimensional implant position assessment using an intraoral scan: new method for postoperative implant control. Implant Dent. 2014;23(5):612–6.

101. von See C, Wagner ME, Schumann P, Lindhorts D, Gellrich NC, Stoelzer M. Non- radiological method for three-dimensional implant position evaluation using an intraoral scan method. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(9):1091–3.
 
102. Lee CY, Wong N, Ganz SD, Mursic J, Suzuki JB. Use of an intraoral laser scanner during the prosthetic phase of implant dentistry: a pilot study. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41(4):e126–312.
 
103. Lin WS, Harris BT, Morton D. The use of a scannable impression coping and digital impression technique to fabricate a customized anatomic abutment and zirconia restoration in the esthetic zone. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(3): 187–91.
 
104. Abdel-Azim T, Zandinejad A, Elathamna E, Lin W, Morton D. The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete- arch frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29(6):1281–8.

105. Vandeweghe S, Vervack V, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(6):648–53.

106. Andriessen FS, Rijkens DR, van der Meer WJ, Wismeijer DW. Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111(3):186–94.
 
107. Gimenez B, Ozcan M, Martinez-Ruis F, Pradies G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation, and depth. Clin Implant Dent Rel Res. 2015;17(Suppl. 1):e54–64.
 
108. Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(4):853–62.
 
109. Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active triangulation technology with blue light for implants: effect of clinically relevant parameters. Implant Dent. 2015; 24(5):498–504.
 
110. Giménez B, Pradíes G, Martínez-Rus F, Özcan M. Accuracy of two digital implant impression systems based on confocal microscopy with variations in customized software and clinical parameters. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(1):56–64.
 
111. Gimenez-Gonzalez B, Hassan B, Özcan M, Pradíes G. An in vitro study of factors influencing the performance of digital intraoral impressions operating on active Wavefront sampling technology with multiple implants in the edentulous maxilla. J Prosthodont 2016 Mar 2. doi: 10.1111/jopr. 12457. [Epub ahead of print].
 
112. Lin WS, Harris BT, Elathamna EN, Abdel-Azim T, Morton D. Effect of implant divergence on the accuracy of definitive casts created from traditional and digital implant-level impressions: an in vitro comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(1):102–9.
 
113. Brandt J, Lauer HC, Peter T, Brandt S. Digital process for an implant- supported fixed dental prosthesis: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114(4):469–73.
 
114. Lin WS, Chou JC, Metz MJ, Harris BT, Morton D. Use of intraoral digital scanning for a CAD/CAM-fabricated milled bar and superstructure framework for an implant- supported, removable complete dental prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113(6):509–15.
 
115. Gherlone EF, Ferrini F, Crespi R, Gastaldi G, Capparé P. Digital impressions for fabrication of definitive "all-on-four" restorations. Implant Dent. 2015; 24(1):125–9.

116. Gherlone E, Capparé P, Vinci R, Ferrini F, Gastaldi G, Crespi R. Conventional versus digital impressions for "all-on-four" restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016;31(2):324–30.
 
117. Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(6):715–9.
 
118. Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Gallucci GO, Doukoudakis A, Weber HP, Chronopoulos V. Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(4):836–45.
 
119. Mansour M, Sanchez E, Machado C. The use of digital impressions to fabricate tooth-supported partial removable dental prostheses: a clinical report. J Prosthodont. 2016;25(6):495–7.

120. Kattadiyil MT, Mursic Z, Airumaih H, Goodacre CJ. Intraoral scanning of hard and soft tissues for partial removable dental prosthesis fabrication. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(3):444–8.
 
121. Schwindling FS, Stober TA. Comparison of two digital techniques for the fabrication of complete removable dental prostheses: a pilot clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(5):756–63.
 
122. Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Virtual smile design systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(4):303–17.
 
123. Lee JH. Accelerated techniques for a post and core and a crown restoration with intraoral digital scanners and CAD/ CAM and rapid prototyping. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(5):1024–9.
 
124. Londono J, Abreu A, Baker PS, Furness AR. Fabrication of a definitive obturator from a 3D cast with a chairside digital scanner for a patient with severe gag reflex: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(5):735–8.
 
125. Chalmers EV, McIntyre GT, Wang W, Gillgrass T, Martin CB, Mossey PA. Intraoral 3D scanning or dental impressions for the assessment of dental arch relationships in cleft care: which is superior? Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(5):568–77.
 
126. Lanis A, Álvarez Del Canto O. The combination of digital surface scanners and cone beam computed tomography technology for guided implant surgery using 3Shape implant studio software: a case history report. Int J Prosthodont. 2015;28(2):169–78.
 
127. Stapleton BS, Lin WS, Ntounis A, Harris BT, Morton D. Application of digital diagnostic impression, virtual planning, and computer-guided implant surgery for a CAD/CAM-fabricated, implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(3):402–8.
 
128. Dolcini GA, Colombo M, Mangano C. From Guided Surgery to Final Prosthesis with a Fully Digital Procedure: A Prospective Clinical Study on 15 Partially Edentulous Patients. Int J Dent. 2016;2016:7358423.
 
129. Flügge TV, Nelson K, Schmelzeisen R, Metzger MC. Three-dimensional plotting and printing of an implant drilling guide: simplifying guided implant surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(8):1340–6.
 
130. Joda T, Brägger U, Gallucci G. Systematic literature review of digital three- dimensional superimposition techniques to create virtual dental patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(2):330–7.
 
131. Jacob HB, Wyatt GD, Buschang PH. Reliability and validity of intraoral and extraoral scanners. Prog Orthod. 2015;16:38.
 
132. Kravitz ND, Groth C, Jones PE, Graham JW, Redmond WR. Intraoral digital scanners. J Clin Orthod. 2014;48(6):337– 47.