Research Information System
BMC Oral Health, vol.26, no.1, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
Background: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the distance and angular accuracy of current intraoral scanners and photogrammetry devices in a full-arch implant model. Methods: Six multi-unit abutment replicas (Astra Tech EV) were placed on an edentulous maxillary model. Scan bodies were placed on the replicas, and a reference model was obtained with a laboratory scanner (inEos X5). Intraoral scannings were made with three different scanners (Primescan, Trios 5, iTero Lumina) and photogrammetry impressions were made after inserting the optical markers of two different devices (PIC system, Oxo Core) into the replicas (n:10). The data obtained from five different study groups and the reference model were transferred to a reverse engineering program (Geomagic) and, the distance and angular accuracy between the analogs were measured. Statistical analyses were performed with Shapiro-Wilk test for normality, followed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests and one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05). Results: Primescan gave the best results in terms of distance trueness (24.75 ± 17.11 μm), while Trios 5 yielded the most deviation (202.01 ± 44.04 μm). Primescan (0.26°) and Pic system (0.28°) were the most accurate study groups in terms of angular trueness. There was no statistically significant difference among the groups in precision comparison. Conclusions: Primescan yielded most accurate results in terms of both distance and angular parameters. Less distance accuracy for Trios 5 and angular accuracy for Oxo Core and iTero Lumina were observed in full-arch implant cases.