Skip to main content

Table 7 Summary of the comparison of DI and CI, and each parameters’ effect regarding trueness of DI. CI, conventional impression; DI, digital impression; IOS, intraoral scanner

From: Trueness and precision of digital implant impressions by intraoral scanners: a literature review

 

DI vs CI

Difference in IOS

Inter-implant distance

Implant angulation

Implant depth

Scan range/edentulous type

Experience of operator

Van der Meer et al. 2012 [13]

  

â–³

    

Giménez B et al. 2015 [18]

   

×

×

 

â—‹

Papaspyridakos et al. 2015 [37]

   

× (< 15°)

   

Ajioka et al. 2016 [14]

DI > CI

      

Amin et al 2016 [23]

DI > CI

â—‹

     

Mangano et al. 2016 [25]

 

â—‹

   

×

 

Chia et al. 2017 [31]

   

â—‹

   

Fukazawa et al. 2017 [12]

 

â—‹

     

Gimenez et al. 2017 [40]

DI is acceptable

  

×

  

â—‹

Imburgia et al. 2017 [28]

 

â—‹

   

â—‹

 

Alikhasi et al. 2018 [19]

DI > CI

  

×

   

Marghalani et al. 2018 [9]

 

â—‹

     

Menini et al. 2018 [39]

DI > CI

      

Arcuri et al. 2019 [26]

   

â—‹

  

×

Di Fore et al. 2019

 

â—‹

Depends on IOS

    

Kim RJY et al. 2019 [28]

       

Mangano et al. 2019 [24]

 

â—‹

   

â—‹

 

Tan et al. 2019 [10]

Depends on IOS

 

â—‹

    
  1. ○: significant effect was observed, △: effect was observed without statistical significance, ×: no effect was observed