Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral
scanner and the traditional impression technique

J 2025

Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique

HYŠPLER, Pavel; Petra URBANOVÁ a Taťjana DOSTÁLOVÁ

Základní údaje

Originální název

Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique

Autoři

HYŠPLER, Pavel; Petra URBANOVÁ a Taťjana DOSTÁLOVÁ

Vydání

JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, MOSBY-ELSEVIER, 2025, 0022-3913

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

10700 1.7 Other natural sciences

Stát vydavatele

Spojené státy

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

URL

Impakt faktor

Impact factor: 4.800 v roce 2024

Označené pro přenos do RIV

Ano

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14310/25:00140308

Organizační jednotka

Přírodovědecká fakulta

Klíčová slova anglicky

Reverse scan technique; Intraoral scanner; Digital dentistry; Implant-supported prostheses; 3D printed cast; Traditional impression technique

Štítky

14314070, rivok

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 3. 2. 2026 10:55, prof. RNDr. Petra Urbanová, Ph.D.

Anotace

V originále

Statement of problem Intraoral scanners have many advantages but have limited applicability for extensive tooth-supported or implant-supported prostheses because of merging errors. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the reverse scan technique (RST) with an intraoral scanner using the traditional impression technique both in vitro and in vivo. Material and methods A participant was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner. Then, the RST was performed 3 times in the oral cavity. One of the intraoral scans was chosen to make a 3-dimensionally (3D) printed cast. The printed cast was scanned 10 times with a laboratory scanner (Control cast) and 10 times with an intraoral scanner (IOS cast). The RST was performed 10 times (RST cast), and 10 dental impressions were made using the traditional splinted technique on the same cast (Impression cast). A laboratory scanner was used to obtain standard tessellation language (STL) files of the tested methods. A newly developed pyramid replacement method was used to evaluate accuracy. This method uses modified virtual abutments with integrated pyramids that determine the exact measurement points. The obtained data were processed using Procrustes analysis and statistically analyzed (α=.05). Results The Procrustes distances were Control cast 0 to 0.4 µm (median 0.3 µm), RST cast 5.6 to 6.9 µm (median 6.2 µm), Impression cast 5.4 to 7.1 µm (median 6.5 µm), and IOS cast group 4.5 to 41.2 µm (median 5.8 µm). In the participant, the Procrustes distance values were RST intraoral 9.5 to 9.6 µm (median 9.5 µm) and IOS intraoral 5.7 to 18.3 µm (median 10.9 µm). Conclusions The reverse scan technique is an acceptable fully digital replacement for traditional impression making. Using an IOS to obtain a 3D cast of an implant-supported interim prosthesis with scannable implant analogs is not recommended. It is more beneficial to use laboratory scanners rather than intraoral scanners for the digitization of precision improvement devices such as bonded interim implant-supported prostheses with a scannable implant analog or solid index.

Návaznosti

MUNI/A/1597/2023, interní kód MU

Název: Rozvoj automatizace při zpracování obrazových dat ve forenzní a aplikované antropologii

Investor: Masarykova univerzita, Rozvoj automatizace při zpracování obrazových dat ve forenzní a aplikované antropologii

MUNI/A/1750/2024, interní kód MU

Název: Automatizace a simulace ve zpracování obrazových dat ve forenzní a aplikované antropologii

Investor: Masarykova univerzita, Automatizace a simulace ve zpracování obrazových dat ve forenzní a aplikované antropologii

Citovat

HYŠPLER, Pavel; Petra URBANOVÁ a Taťjana DOSTÁLOVÁ. Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY. MOSBY-ELSEVIER, 2025, roč. 134, č. 6, s. 2515-2523. ISSN 0022-3913. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012.

@article{2438757,
   author = {Hyšpler, Pavel and Urbanová, Petra and Dostálová, Taťjana},
   article_number = {6},
   doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012},
   keywords = {Reverse scan technique; Intraoral scanner; Digital dentistry; Implant-supported prostheses; 3D printed cast; Traditional impression technique},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0022-3913},
   journal = {JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY},
   title = {Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique},
   url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012},
   volume = {134},
   year = {2025}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 2438757
AU  - Hyšpler, Pavel - Urbanová, Petra - Dostálová, Taťjana
PY  - 2025
TI  - Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique
JF  - JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
VL  - 134
IS  - 6
SP  - 2515-2523
EP  - 2515-2523
PB  - MOSBY-ELSEVIER
SN  - 00223913
KW  - Reverse scan technique
KW  - Intraoral scanner
KW  - Digital dentistry
KW  - Implant-supported prostheses
KW  - 3D printed cast
KW  - Traditional impression technique
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012
N2  - Statement of problem Intraoral scanners have many advantages but have limited applicability for extensive tooth-supported or implant-supported prostheses because of merging errors. Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the reverse scan technique (RST) with an intraoral scanner using the traditional impression technique both in vitro and in vivo. Material and methods A participant was scanned 10 times with an intraoral scanner. Then, the RST was performed 3 times in the oral cavity. One of the intraoral scans was chosen to make a 3-dimensionally (3D) printed cast. The printed cast was scanned 10 times with a laboratory scanner (Control cast) and 10 times with an intraoral scanner (IOS cast). The RST was performed 10 times (RST cast), and 10 dental impressions were made using the traditional splinted technique on the same cast (Impression cast). A laboratory scanner was used to obtain standard tessellation language (STL) files of the tested methods. A newly developed pyramid replacement method was used to evaluate accuracy. This method uses modified virtual abutments with integrated pyramids that determine the exact measurement points. The obtained data were processed using Procrustes analysis and statistically analyzed (α=.05). Results The Procrustes distances were Control cast 0 to 0.4 µm (median 0.3 µm), RST cast 5.6 to 6.9 µm (median 6.2 µm), Impression cast 5.4 to 7.1 µm (median 6.5 µm), and IOS cast group 4.5 to 41.2 µm (median 5.8 µm). In the participant, the Procrustes distance values were RST intraoral 9.5 to 9.6 µm (median 9.5 µm) and IOS intraoral 5.7 to 18.3 µm (median 10.9 µm). Conclusions The reverse scan technique is an acceptable fully digital replacement for traditional impression making. Using an IOS to obtain a 3D cast of an implant-supported interim prosthesis with scannable implant analogs is not recommended. It is more beneficial to use laboratory scanners rather than intraoral scanners for the digitization of precision improvement devices such as bonded interim implant-supported prostheses with a scannable implant analog or solid index.
ER  -

HYŠPLER, Pavel; Petra URBANOVÁ a Taťjana DOSTÁLOVÁ. Comparison of the reverse scan technique with an intraoral scanner and the traditional impression technique. \textit{JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY}. MOSBY-ELSEVIER, 2025, roč.~134, č.~6, s.~2515-2523. ISSN~0022-3913. Dostupné z: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.08.012.

Přehled o publikaci