The Modern Digital Intraoral Scanning Systems: A Review

1 Cicciù M, Fiorillo L, D'Amico C et al. 3D digital impression systems compared with traditional techniques in dentistry: a recent data systematic review. Materials. 2020; 13(8): 1982. Search in Google Scholar

2 Karakas-Stupar I, Zitzmann N, Joda T. A novel reference model for dental scanning system evaluation: analysis of five intraoral scanners. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics. 2022; 14(2): 63-69. Search in Google Scholar

3 Kravitz ND, Groth C, Jones PE et al. Intraoral digital scanners, Journal of clinical orthodontics. 2014; 48(6):337-347. Search in Google Scholar

4 Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G et al. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC oral health. 2017; 17(1):1-11. Search in Google Scholar

5 What is an Intraoral Scanner and How Does it Work? https://www.launcadental.com/what-is-an-intraoral-scanner-and-how-does-it-work (accessed 13 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

6 Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L et al. Intraoral scanner technologies: a review to make a successful impression. Journal of healthcare engineering. 2017; Artide ID 8427595. Search in Google Scholar

7 DIGITAL IMPRESSIONS: VIRTUALLY PERFECT http://www.thedentalarcade.com/blog/digital-impressions-virtually-perfect/ (accessed 20 December 2022) Search in Google Scholar

8 Gogushev K, Abadjiev M, Valcheva Z. Comparison conventional and digital impression technique in prosthetic dentistry: a literature review. Varna medical forum. 2021; 10(1):162-168. (in Bulgarian). Search in Google Scholar

9 Punj A, Bompolaki D, Garaicoa, J. Dental impression materials and techniques. Dental Clinics. 2017; 61(4)779-796. Search in Google Scholar

10 Kulkarni M, Thombare R. Dimensionai changes of alginate dental impression materials-An in vitro study. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2015; 9(8):ZC98. Search in Google Scholar

11 Aragón M, Pontes L, Bichara L et al. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review. European journal of orthodontics. 2016; 38(4):429-434. Search in Google Scholar

12 Eto N, Yamazoe J, Tsuji A et al. Development of an artificial intelligence-based algorithm to classify images acquired with an intraoral scanner of individual molar teeth into three categories. Plos one. 2022; 17(1):e0261870. Search in Google Scholar

13 Priyanka G, Sujesh M, Kumar R et al. Digital impressions in prosthodontics – Past, present and future trends. IP Ann. Prost Rest Dent. 2022; 6:66-70. Search in Google Scholar

14 Swapna B, Kamath V. Digital Impressions In Prosthodontics – An Overview. Journal of Critical Reviews. 2020; 7(14):733-735. Search in Google Scholar

15 Intraoral scanners: Brand comparison, uses, and more https://www.meetdandy.com/articles/intraoral-scanner-comparison-pros-and-cons/ (accessed 20 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

16 Patzelt S, Lamprinos C, Stampf S et al. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J Ame Dental Assoc. 2014; 145(6): 542-551. Search in Google Scholar

17 Jorquera G, Sampaio C, Bozzalla A et al. Evaluation of trueness and precision of two intraoral scanners and a conventional impression: an in vivo clinical study. Quintessence Int. 2021;52(10), 904-910. Search in Google Scholar

18 Róth I, Czigola A, Joós-Kovàcs G et al. Leaming curve of digital intraoral scanning-an in vivo study. BMC oral health. 2020; 20(1), 1-7. Search in Google Scholar

19 Yang C, Cheng C, Ye S et al. A double blinded trial to compare the patient satisfaction and crown accuracy of two different intraoral scanners for the fabrication of monolithic lithium disilicate single crowns. Journal of Dental Sciences. 2022; In Press. Search in Google Scholar

20 The benefits of digital dental impressions https://blog.ddslab.com/the-benefits-of-digital-dental-impressions (accessed 27 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

21 Gavounelis N, Gogola C, Halazonetis D. The Effect of Scanning Strategy on Intraoral Scanner's Accuracy. Dentistry Journal 2022; 10(7): 123-133. Search in Google Scholar

22 Manicone P, De Angelis P, Rella E et al. Patient preference and clinical working time between digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2022; 128(4):589-596. Search in Google Scholar

23 Kernen F, Schlager S, Alvarez V et al. Accuracy of intraoral scans: An in vivo study of different scanning devices. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2022; 128(6):1303-1309. Search in Google Scholar

24 Suese K. Progress in digital dentistry: The practical use of intraoral scanners. Dental Materials Journal. 2020; 39(1):52-56. Search in Google Scholar

25 Tomita Y, Uechi J, Konno M et al. Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning. Dental materials journal. 2018; 37(4):628-633. Search in Google Scholar

26 Ali A. Accuracy of digital impressions achieved from five different digital impression Systems. Dentistry. 2015; 5(5): 1. Search in Google Scholar

27 Vàg J, Renne W, Revell G et al. The effect of software updates on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanners. Quintessence Int. 2021 ; 52(7):636-44. Search in Google Scholar

28 Sanda M, Miyoshi K, Baba K. Trueness and precision of digital implant impressions by intraoral scanners: a literature review. International Journal of Implant Dentistry. 2021; 7:1-25. Search in Google Scholar

29 Revilla-León M, Young K, Sicilia E et al. Influence of definitive and interim restorative materials and surface finishing on the scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner. Journal of Dentistry. 2022; 120:104-114. Search in Google Scholar

30 Alikhasi M, Alsharbaty M, Moharrami M. Digital implant impression technique accuracy: a systematic review. Implant dentistry. 2017; 26(6):929-935. Search in Google Scholar

31 Arcuri L, Lorenzi C, Cecchetti F, et al. Full digital workflow for implant-prosthetic rehabilitations: a case report. ORAL & implantology. 2015; 8(4):114. Search in Google Scholar

32 Mizumoto R, Yilmaz B, McGlumphy Jr et al. Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete arch implant-supported prostheses. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2020; 123(1): 96-104. Search in Google Scholar

33 Amornvit P, Rokaya D, Sanohkan S. Comparison of accuracy of current ten intraoral scanners. BioMed Research International. 2021; Article ID 2673040:10 pages. Search in Google Scholar

34 Dalai A, Rathi S, Dhamande M. Digital Impressions in Dentistry. Journal of research of medical and dental science. 2022; 10(7):76-81. Search in Google Scholar

35 Intraoral Scanner Reviews from IDS 2021 + IOS Market Update https://instituteofdigitaldentistry.com/news/intraoral-scanner-reviews-from-ids-2021-ios-market-update/ (accessed 1 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

36 Gutmacher Z., Kelly A., Renne W., et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of multiple digital impression systems on a fully edentulous maxilla. Quintessence Int. 2021 ; 52(6):488-495. Search in Google Scholar

37 Hack G, Patzelt S. Evaluation of the accuracy of six intraoral scanning devices: an in-vitro investigation. ADA Prof Prod Rev.2015; 10(4):1-5. Search in Google Scholar

38 https://www.3shape.com/ (accessed 13 December 2022) Search in Google Scholar

39 https://www.dentsplysirona.com/en-us (accessed 1 December 2022) Search in Google Scholar

40 https://academy.medit.com/courses/meditlink-regular-users-en (accessed 27 December 2022) Search in Google Scholar

41 https://itero.com/ (accessed 30 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

42 https://www.launcadental.com/ (accessed 16 November 2022) Search in Google Scholar

43 Pavlova V, Pavlov B, Vlahova A et al. Aesthetic prosthetic rehabilitation by digital smile design. Science and Youth Text-book. 2021;6:290-294. Search in Google Scholar

44 Damyanova D. Scanner SkyScan Microtomography With Temporary Teeth. Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 2017; 16,7(VI):92-95. Search in Google Scholar

45 Rangelov S. Contemporary requirements to fixed interim prosthetic constructions. Problems of dental medicine. 2021; 47(1):13-19. Search in Google Scholar

46 Hristozova M, Zlatev S, Vlahova A. A fully digital approach in aesthetic rehabilitation, Case report, Oral presentation. Science and Youth Conference MU-Plovdiv. 2021. Search in Google Scholar

47 Gerdzhikov I. Basic principles and stages of treatment of patients with maxillary resection. Knowledge international journal, scientific papers, medical sciences and health. 2017; 26(4):1301-1306. Search in Google Scholar

48 Gerdzhikov I. Combined prosthetic treatment options for patients with hard palate resection. Knowledge international journal, scientific papers, medical sciences and health. 2017; 26(4): 1327-1330. Search in Google Scholar

49 Shindjalova R, Prodanova K, Svechtarov V. Modeling Data for Tilted Implants in Grafted with Bio-Oss Maxillary Sinuses Using Logistic Regression. – AIP Conference Proceedings. 2014; 1631:58-62. Search in Google Scholar

50 Vlahova A. Preparation junctions for all-ceramic CAD/CAM crown and bridge restorations. Balkan Journal of Dental Medicine. 2016; 20(2):122-125. Search in Google Scholar

51 Rangelov S. Additive digital technologies in contemporary dental medicine, A review, International Interdisciplinary Virtual Meeting “Alumni Club and Friends”. Book of Proceedings. 2021:140-143. Search in Google Scholar