Objective: To evaluate and compare the accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry (IPG) and direct digital impressions in capturing the three-dimensional (3D) implant position in a fully edentulous mandible model with four multi-unit abutments (MUAs).
Methods: An edentulous mandibular model with four implant analogs was scanned with a reference desktop scanner (INEOS X5®, Sirona) and four different intraoral scanners (IOSs; TRIOS 5®, 3SHAPE; i700®, MEDIT; Aoralscan 3® and Aoralscan Elite IPG®, SHINING 3D), the latter being equipped with an IPG system. In total, 120 scans (30 per IOS) were captured and saved in standard tessellation language (STL) format. The IOS scans were then compared with the reference desktop scan using a 3D analysis software (Inspect®, ZEISS) to evaluate accuracy through the distance standard deviation, integrated distance, and integrated absolute distance. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics v25® (IBM CORPORATION) and Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests.
Results: The IOS equipped with IPG (Aoralscan Elite IPG®) demonstrated the highest accuracy in all measured parameters. It showed a statistically significantly lower (p < 0.01) distance standard deviation, integrated distance, and integrated absolute distance compared to the direct impressions taken with the other three IOSs (TRIOS 5®, i700®, and Aoralscan 3®). Among the direct digital implant impressions without IPG, TRIOS 5® exhibited the best performance, while i700® and Aoralscan 3® showed higher deviations.
Conclusions: Based on the preliminary results of this in vitro study, IPG demonstrated the highest accuracy in all measured parameters compared to direct digital implant impressions with IOSs; however, clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.
Statement of clinical relevance: IPG might represent an accurate and reliable method for obtaining implant impressions in full-arch cases, offering significant advantages for clinicians in the field of implant prosthodontics.
Keywords: Dental implants; Full-arch; Intraoral photogrammetry; Intraoral scanners; Multi-unit abutments; Standard tesselletion language files.
Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.