Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 6 (1), 22-9

Evaluation of Different Approaches for Using a Laser Scanner in Digitization of Dental Impressions


Evaluation of Different Approaches for Using a Laser Scanner in Digitization of Dental Impressions

Wan-Sun Lee et al. J Adv Prosthodont.


Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical application of digitized silicone rubber impressions by comparing the accuracy of zirconia 3-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated from 2 types of data (working model and impression) obtained from a laser scanner.

Materials and methods: Ten working models and impressions were prepared with epoxy resin and vinyl polysiloxane, respectively. Based on the data obtained from the laser scanner (D-700; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark), a total of 20 zirconia frameworks were prepared using a dental CAD/CAM system (DentalDesigner; 3shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark / Ener-mill, Dentaim, Seoul, Korea). The silicone replicas were sectioned into four pieces to evaluate the framework fit. The replicas were imaged using a digital microscope, and the fit of the reference points (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7) were measured using the program in the device. Measured discrepancies were divided into 5 categories of gaps (MG, CG, AWG, AOTG, OG). Data were analyzed with Student's t-test (α=0.05), repeated measures ANOVA and two-way ANOVA (α=0.05).

Results: The mean gap of the zirconia framework prepared from the working models presented a narrower discrepancy than the frameworks fabricated from the impression bodies. The mean of the total gap in premolars (P=.003) and molars (P=.002) exhibited a statistical difference between two groups.

Conclusion: The mean gap dimensions of each category showed statistically significant difference. Nonetheless, the digitized impression bodies obtained with a laser scanner were applicable to clinical settings, considering the clinically acceptable marginal fit (120 µm).

Keywords: Dental CAD/CAM system; Digitization of impression bodies; Internal gap; Marginal gap; Zirconia three-unit FPDs.


Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Image magnified of a quarter silicone replica at the margin area.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Cross-sectional view of locations for gap width measurements on silicone replicas: P1, marginal gap; P2, cervical gap (400 µm above P1); P3, 1/3 of axial from marginal gap; P4, 2/3 of axial from marginal gap; P5, axio-occlusal transition gap; P6, occlusal gap (1/2 of P5and P7); P7, central gap.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 PubMed Central articles


    1. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009;28:44–56. - PubMed
    1. Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB. Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2008;29:494, 496, 498–505. - PubMed
    1. Ender A, Wiedhahn K, Mörmann WH. Chairside multi-unit restoration of a quadrant using the new Cerec 3D software. Int J Comput Dent. 2003;6:89–94. - PubMed
    1. Christensen GJ. In-office CAD/CAM milling of restorations: the future? J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139:83–85. - PubMed
    1. Kurbad A. The optical conditioning of Cerec preparations with scan spray. Int J Comput Dent. 2000;3:269–279. - PubMed