Trueness of different scanning methods for acquired maxillary defect: An invitro study

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigates the trueness of three different intraoral scanning methods using intraoral scanner for acquired maxillary defect compared to extraoral scanning method using desktop scanner. Materials and Methods: A cast of an acquired maxillary defect was duplicated to ten casts (n=30), each duplicated cast was scanned using desktop scanner as a reference data, then each cast was scanned using intraoral scanner performed by three different scanning methods as measured data. The STL (Standard Tessellation Language) file of the desktop scanning method is compared to the STL (Standard Tessellation Language) files of the three methods of the intraoral scanning technique using Medit Link v4.4 surface matching software program. The deviation of the three methods was recorded and statistically analysed through one-way ANOVA and Tukey as post-hoc tests, where α = 0.05.Results: The second scanning method showed significantly lower deviation (113.7 ± 9.9 µm) when compared to the first and third scanning method (143 ± 21.6 µm, 139.4 ± 26.2 µm) respectively, (P<.05). However, there was no statistically significant different between the first and the third scanning method (p = .91870).Conclusions: It is recommended to use the second scanning method because it had the least deviation when compared to the other methods.