Objective The continuous evolution of intraoral scanners (IOS) has resulted in devices with comparable performance in accuracy, speed, and usability. However, as technical differences diminish, clinical indication has become the decisive factor for scanner selection. This study introduced and validated a new testing protocol that evaluates IOS across distinct clinical scenarios, enabling indication-driven comparison. The web page and testing procedure have been ongoing at Semmelweis University since 2019, and 36 scanner systems have already been tested. Methods Building on the established Semmelweis framework, the new protocol utilized standardized models representing various clinical indications (crowded dentition, partially edentulous arch with prepared teeth, and edentulous full arch with implants). Each scanner was tested by trained clinicians and dental students using manufacturer-recommended scanning protocols. Objective parameters, including scanning time, trueness, precision, and user experience, were measured for each indication. Results were systematically recorded and published on the dedicated web platform. Results All tested scanners performed well in general accuracy, speed, and ease of use, confirming technological advancements. However, the new indication-based protocol revealed clinically significant differences between scanners in specific scenarios. The new protocol enabled clearer differentiation and provided more relevant guidance for device selection. User feedback confirmed that the new approach is more informative and practical for clinical decision-making. Conclusions The indication-based protocol developed and applied at Semmelweis University offers a more clinically relevant and effective method for comparing IOS. This approach supports practitioners in making evidence-based, scenario-driven choices and represents a significant advancement in objective IOS evaluation.

OBJECTIVES:This in vitro study evaluated the accuracy of digital impressions for full-arch implantsupported restorations by assessing scan body (SB) positional accuracy and inter-arch registration under different intraoral scanners (IOS) and scan protocol conditions. METHODS:Two IOSs (Medit i700 and Trios 5) were evaluated across multiple protocols. In Part A, SB trueness and precision were investigated using three inter-implant distances (1-2, 1-3, 1-4) and angulations across five groups (n = 10 each), with and without reference objects (ROs) on an edentulous maxillary model. In Part B, inter-arch distance accuracy was evaluated with the help of four sphere pairs used in the same upper edentulous arch with implants and a dentated mandibular model in an articulator using six scanning protocols, including one- and two-step bite registration. Trueness and precision were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models for each data type. RESULTS:In Part A, Medit i700 with ROs (A-M700-RO) showed the highest trueness and precision in both linear and angular SB measurements. RO use significantly improved performance, particularly for Trios 5. Angular deviation was lowest in A-M700-RO, especially in distal segments (mean difference -0.24°, p < 0.05). In Part B, Trios 5 with a two-step RO bite registration (B-T5-RO-1) had the highest inter-arch accuracy, especially in molar regions. Accuracy in this group was significantly higher than all other groups (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Digital impression accuracy is influenced by both the scanner type and scanning protocol. Additional reference objects improved the accuracy of distance measurements but did not significantly affect measurements of angulation. Medit i700 outperforms in SB accuracy, while Trios 5 excels in inter-arch registration when combined with ROs and a two-step protocol. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:Additional reference objects may improve the digital implant impressions' distance accuracy, although they do not significantly affect angulation outcomes.

Objective The digital transformation of dentistry is reshaping the collaboration between dental clinics and laboratories. Contemporary digital dentistry workflows frequently depend on disparate systems and disconnected digital channels, which can result in data inconsistencies, communication gaps, and workflow inefficiencies. This underscores the growing need for a comprehensive, integrated digital platform that facilitates effective data exchange across all stages of the digital workflow. This study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-supported, cloud-based enterprise resource planning system—Dental Digital Order—that facilitates streamlined communication between dental clinics and laboratories. The system is designed to minimize administrative workload, reduce errors, and enhance workflow transparency through real-time data processing and notifications. Methods The Dental Digital Order platform integrated AI modules to automatically verify and process digital files (STL, OBJ, PLY, and JPG). Faulty data was detected and filtered, whereas relevant metadata was structured and stored on a secure cloud-based system with version control. Built-in feedback mechanisms provided real-time status updates, ensuring that all stakeholders remain informed throughout the process. Results The platform resulted in fewer communication errors and improved workflow efficiency. AI-driven data processing accelerated production, reduced errors, and minimized the need for remakes. User feedback highlighted increased client satisfaction, improved production planning, and greater adherence to delivery timelines. Conclusions The Dental Digital Order system provides a modern solution to enhance communication and efficiency between dental clinics and laboratories. It supports higher-quality treatment outcomes, streamlined workflows, and sustainable dental practice operations, meeting the demands of contemporary digital dentistry.

Objective To investigate the current role of artificial intelligence (AI) in digital smile design by comparing AI-driven workflows to conventional methods based on facial analysis. Methods Although aesthetic principles guide smile design, the perception of attractiveness remains influenced by subjective factors beyond measurable parameters. Smile designs were created for 10 volunteer patients by four dental students. Standardized documentation followed the DSD photo protocol, after which facial evaluation was performed using the 10-step smile frame, and designs were generated with 3Shape Trios smile design software. Conventional designs were completed first. Subsequently, AI-based designs were produced using the Smilefy application, which autonomously analyzes a single facial portrait and generates a comprehensive, editable treatment plan. To minimize visual bias, AI-generated designs were manually adjusted to match the tooth shades of the conventional plans. Results A total of 150 participants—comprising 50 dentists, 50 dental students, and 50 laypeople—completed an online questionnaire, evaluating both design types against original photographs using a 1-to-6 rating scale. In nine of 10 cases, manual designs were rated as more aesthetic. Dentists, students, and laypeople awarded manual designs 23%, 27%, and 16% higher scores, respectively. Specialty-based differences were also noted, with prosthodontists, dentoalveolar surgeons, endodontists, and orthodontists favoring conventional designs by 23%, 27%, 28%, and 18%, respectively. Conclusions Although AI streamlines and accelerates the smile design process, it cannot yet replace manual planning, which depends on both objective data and the clinician’s individual, subjective judgment.

Objective The copy-paste workflow in digital dentistry enables patients to test planned restorations both functionally and aesthetically using prototypes, which improves the predictability of treatment outcomes. Rescanning the worn prototype allows modification of the digital wax-up, serving as the basis for milling the final monolithic zirconia restoration. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of the copy-paste workflow in both anterior and molar regions using in vitro models. Methods Zirconia and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) splint restorations were milled from identical digital wax-ups. Preparations were made on a maxillary model (teeth 12, 11, 21, 22, 15, 16, and 17). High- and low-resolution intraoral scans were performed. Tooth shapes were selected from a natural library. Prototypes were milled from PMMA, final restorations from monolithic zirconia. Restorations were repositioned on the original model and scanned. STL files were analyzed using Geomagic Control X. Anterior and molar regions were assessed separately. Deviations were calculated using root mean square (RMS) values and reported as RMS±standard deviation. Results The findings indicated that, in the anterior region, zirconia splints showed smaller deviations (84.1–108 µm) than PMMA prototypes (103.3–137.2 µm). In the molar region, PMMA splints were more accurate (149.9–180.3 µm), whereas zirconia showed excess material on occlusal surfaces (221.5–238.3 µm). Low-resolution scans were less precise but comparable in trueness. Conclusions Greater inaccuracies in the molar region likely result from complex occlusal morphology. In the anterior region, zirconia splints showed smaller deviations from the reference, possibly due to PMMA deformation caused by heat during milling.

Objective To evaluate the accuracy of provisional polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) crowns produced using the CEREC Primemill. Methods A hard acrylic maxillary central incisor was chamfer prepared and digitized using the CEREC Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA) intraoral scanner. A crown was designed in CEREC SW 5.2.9 software with a 100 μm cement gap and a 75° margin ramp angle. Nine Telio CAD (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) PMMA crowns were milled using new burs. CEREC Primemill used two PMMA burs (1.0 and 2.5 mm) in “fine” mode. Internal surfaces were scanned and superimposed on the reference design in Geomagic Control X (Rock Hill, SC, USA) to assess trueness and precision. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=0.05). Results Clinically acceptable crowns were produced with only minimal deviations observed from the initial reference design. An average deviation of 0.0033±0.0009 mm was recorded for the crowns created with the CEREC Primemill. No statistically significant differences were found compared to the reference (p<0.05); all results fell within the clinical acceptance threshold. Conclusions CEREC Primemill can fabricate provisional crowns with acceptable internal accuracy. Chairside CAD/CAM can be a reliable alternative for the efficient fabrication of accurate temporary restorations.

Objectives This in vitro study evaluated the effective scanning depth of an intraoral scanner and the influence of scanning strategy on steep surfaces. Methods Two 3D-printed test models were fabricated: a faceted hyper-cone for a range of surface inclinations, and a stepped inverted pyramid for the effective depth-capture limit. Each model was scanned ten times. The hyper-cone was also scanned ten times single-direction and ten times bi-directional. A desktop scanner (3Shape E4; reported trueness <20 μm, precision <5 μm) served as the reference standard. Trueness and precision were quantified using 3D reverse-engineering and metrology software. Normality was assessed with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Each group was compared with the reference using a one-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, and the two strategies with an independent-samples t-test or Mann–Whitney U test according to distribution (α = 0.05). Results For steep surfaces, single-direction scanning resulted in a significant deviation compared with the reference (trueness 18 ± 4 μm; p = 0.010). Conversely, bi-directional scanning showed no significant difference from the reference (5.0 ± 0.7 μm; p = 0.200). A significant difference was found between the single-direction and bi-directional scanning methods (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the scanner reliably captured data to a depth of 20 mm (mean deviation 17 ± 5 μm; p = 0.200). Conclusions Scanning strategy affects the accuracy of digital scans on steep geometries, and a bi-directional path reduced local distortion. Under controlled in vitro conditions, data were captured reliably to a depth of 20 mm. Clinical Significance When scanning deep or steeply angled preparations, recording the surface from more than one direction may help reduce local distortion. This finding is based on a controlled in vitro model and should be confirmed under clinical conditions.

Objective To determine how the depth of scanned surface affects trueness and precision of digital impressions taken with the CEREC Primescan intraoral scanner. Methods A 3D-printed polymethyl methacrylate inverse pyramid model was fabricated using an ASIGA 3D printer. This model featured 25 horizontal steps, each 1 mm high and 0.25 mm wide, reaching a maximum depth of 25 mm. The model was scanned 10 times using the CEREC Primescan. The scanner head was positioned perpendicularly over the pyramid’s upper surface to capture the internal cavity. A 3Shape E4 desktop scanner served as the reference scanner. All scan data were exported as STL files and analyzed using Geomagic Control X software with best-fit alignment. Trueness and precison values were assed. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and two-sample t-test (Mann-Whitney U test) were conducted for statistical analysis with a significance level of 0.05. Results The CEREC Primescan reliably captured surfaces up to 20 mm depth with clinically acceptable accuracy. Mean trueness across the entire surface was 0.017±0.005 mm (p=0.2), with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.065±0.016 mm (p=0.084) and root mean square (RMS) of 0.067±0.017 mm (p=0.018). Precision measurements revealed mean deviations of -0.024±0.03 mm, with an SD of 0.134±0.073 mm and RMS values of 0.138±0.076 mm. Accuracy decreased near detection thresholds but remained within a clinically acceptable threshold. Conclusions Within the limits of this in vitro study, increasing surface depth (up to ∼20 mm) did not significantly change the accuracy of the CEREC Primescan. The device can reliably scan deep regions with clinically acceptable trueness and precision, supporting its use for capturing complex intraoral features in advanced prosthodontic and restorative workflows.

PURPOSE:To produce CAD/CAM reference samples for shade communication milled from the restoration materials zirconia (ZrO2) and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) and evaluate the color difference with the corresponding conventional VITA Classical (VC) shade tab. Furthermore, to verify the color consistency of the materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In total, 55 samples were milled out of ZrO2 and ZLS in five different colors, and their color parameters were compared to the corresponding VC tabs both visually and digitally. For digital evaluation, images were taken of the samples and VC tabs and analyzed in Adobe Photoshop to extract L*a*b* values. Color difference (ΔE00) was calculated using the CIEDE 2000 formula. Multilevel mixed-effects linear regression model was used to derive estimates of the mean ∆E00. RESULTS:Color difference was significantly higher than 1.8 in the case of all the ZrO2 samples and for the ZLS A3, B2, and C2 samples. Color difference was also found during the visual comparison. Comparing the same color samples, the ΔE00 exceeded 0.8 in some cases but stayed under 1.8 in every case and showed no color difference visually. CONCLUSIONS:When comparing CAD/CAM samples and VC shade tabs, visible and measurable color differences (ΔE00 > AT50:50%) were found in the case of all ZrO2 samples and in three out of five evaluated shades of ZLS samples. The color consistency of the blocks was acceptable. Better shade communication and more reliable shade reproduction is achieved when reference photos are sent with a color sample made from the restoration material.

Objectives Numerous studies have been conducted on the accuracy of dental restorations fabricated via additive manufacturing (AM) and subtractive manufacturing (SM); however, the results are conflicting. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the internal and marginal fit of fixed restorations made using AM compared to SM. Methods Studies investigating internal and marginal fit of fixed dental restorations, which were manufactured by AM and SM, were involved. An electronic search was performed across four databases in May 2022, and it was restricted to articles in English language. After study selection and data extraction, 38 eligible studies were included and sub-grouped by material type (metal, ceramic and interim). The outcomes were specified as internal and marginal fit expressed in mean difference (µm). QUIN and GRADE tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence. Results Fabricating interim crowns, SM showed significantly higher mean difference with 25.95 µm in internal fit and 4.45 µm in marginal fit compared to AM. In the metal group, AM provided higher mean difference in internal fit with 5.69 µm; however, in marginal fit, SM showed higher mean difference with 7.04 µm. In case of ceramics, AM showed higher mean difference in marginal fit with 18.91 µm compared to SM with no statistically significant difference. Conclusion The findings of the systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that fixed restorations manufactured with AM are favourable alternatives in the digital workflow compared to SM.

OBJECTIVE:The objective was to investigate the dimensional stability of different types of 3D printed dental models, and to measure the dimensional changes over time. METHODS:Four dental casts with different constructions were printed. The four types of models were as follows: hollow casts with 2.5 mm wall thickness (2,5mm.H), hollow casts with 2 mm wall thickness (2mm.H), hollow casts with 2 mm wall thickness with stabilization bars (2mm.B) and hollow casts with 2 mm wall thickness with gypsum base (2mm.G). The casts were digitized with a laboratory scanner (3Shape E3 Red E Scanner) to obtain the reference Standard Tessellation Language (STL) files. All models were stored at room temperature and scanned again after 1 day and after 1, 2 and 10 weeks. This data was compared to the reference STL file and was analysed by comparing the deformation using surface fitting software (Geomagic Control X, 3D Systems). The results were statistically evaluated using paired Student's t-tests, with the significance level set at p < 0.05. RESULTS:There were significant differences in dimensional stability after 10 weeks between the four different dental casts. According to our results, the 2mm.B casts showed the least deformation which was followed by the 2mm.H casts. However, both the 2,5mm.H and the 2mm.G casts showed significant deformation compared to the 2mm.B casts. CONCLUSIONS:Within the limitations of this study - using only one printer and one type of resin - we found that the deformation of all investigated casts remained within the clinically acceptable range. However, there were significant differences between the various construction types printed with the Bego Varseo Printer and Bego Varseo Wax Model Gray material. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:It is crucial to determine how long 3D printed models can maintain their accuracy to prevent potential adverse effects, especially given the extended storage periods required for the time-consuming procedures in prosthodontic and orthodontic treatments.

Purpose To assess the accuracy of scanning technologies for constructing facial prostheses on human faces.Study selection Our systematic search was performed on five databases. Studies reporting on human volunteers (P) whose faces were scanned with a scanning technology were eligible. The anthropometrical interlandmark distances (ILDs) were used as indicators of accuracy; the ILDs are measured on the virtual models (I) and directly on the faces (C). The virtual models deviated from their true values (O). Studies reporting the measurements on patients with or without facial deformities were included, but cadavers or inanimate objects were reasons for exclusion. We performed a mean difference (MD) / standardized MD analysis with a random effect model. The difficulties regarding the scanning procedure mentioned in the articles were also assessed.Results We found 3723 records after duplicate removal. Twenty five articles were eligible for the qualitative review, and ten articles were included in the quantitative synthesis. Eight different ILDs were compared in MD analyses. The differences were between -0.54-0.43 mm. We also performed a regional three-dimensional analysis to compare scanning technologies in each major region. No significant differences were found in any of the regions and axes. The most mentioned difficulties were artifacts due to motion or blinking.Conclusions The results suggest no systematic skew in linear dimensions neither between direct caliper measurements nor between measurements on the scanned models, scanning technologies, or facial regions.

Objectives Numerous studies have been conducted on the adaptation of dental restorations fabricated by additive (AM) and subtractive manufacturing (SM); however, the results are conflicting. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the fit and trueness of fixed restorations made by AM compared to SM. Data Studies investigating internal fit, marginal fit, and trueness of fixed prostheses were involved. Sources The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42022323090). An electronic search was performed with a predefined search query across four medical databases on the 6th of September 2023. Study selection A total of 57 eligible studies were included and sub-grouped by material type (metals, ceramics, acrylic resins, composites). The outcomes were specified as internal fit, marginal fit, and trueness expressed in micrometer (µm). Further subgrouping was based on measurement area: axial, occlusal, and marginal. When we analyzed marginal fit, there were no statistically significant differences between the two techniques in any of the subgroups. The measurement of internal fit metal and ceramic restorations provided no significant differences. However, milled acrylic resin restorations showed a significantly higher occlusal gap compared to 3D printed prostheses with 39.12 µm (95% CI: 12.44; 65.79). In the case of trueness, a statistically significant difference was observed between ceramic AM and SM restorations with -47.76 µm (95% CI: -95.51; -0.00). QUIN and GRADE Pro tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. Conclusion Fixed restorations manufactured with additive manufacturing are valid alternatives to subtractive manufacturing in the digital workflow. Clinical significance Additive manufacturing is an accurate and cost-effective manufacturing method of digital workflow, especially for metal and resin fixed restorations. Once the challenges in ceramics manufacturing are addressed, AM will show more significant promise in the field.

Purpose To evaluate the CEREC Primescan's accuracy at the lowest and highest operating temperatures. Methods A printed PMMA maxillary model was used as the reference. To capture the surface temperature, a thermal camera FLIR TG267 (FLIR Systems, Wilsonville, Oregon, USA) was used. A CEREC Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA) maintained at 21°C was used to create 15 digital impressions. Fifteen digital impressions were also created at the highest working temperature. The differences were registered with full-arch superimpositions. The data were analysed with the statistical program SPSS. Non-parametric tests were performed to assess how true the two groups were, as well as how different they were from one another. The precision of the two temperatures' data was described using descriptive statistics. The difference between the two groups was determined by comparing the difference between the two variabilities. Results The scanner temperature ranges from 22±1°C to 41.5±0.5°C. There were no significant differences from the reference to the minimum (0.23 mm) or maximum (0.12 mm) temperatures. Significant difference was shown between the two sets of temperature data. The lowest temperature data distortion surpassed, but the maximum temperature distortions were within the clinically acceptable range. Comparable levels of precision were observed at the two temperatures. Analysis of the variability of the two groups revealed no differences. Conclusion The manufacturer's instructions indicate that the scanner operates reliably when used properly. The observed low temperature may have a minor impact on the scanner's accuracy. At high temperatures, work performance may be noticeably impacted.

There is a growing need for effective methods in the management of early stage carious lesions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of combined casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) and fluoride on white spot lesions (WSLs) compared to fluoride-only interventions. This meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021286245). The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched until October 17, 2022. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials. Outcome variables included laser fluorescence (LF), quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), and lesion area scores. The random-effects model was used for analysis, and results were given as standardized mean difference (SMD) and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool, and the level of evidence with GRADE. Our systematic search yielded 973 records after duplicate removal, 21 studies were included for qualitative synthesis, and 15 studies were eligible for quantitative analysis. No significant difference was found between CPP-ACP and fluoride versus fluoride alone in LF at 1, 3, and 6 months of use: SMD −0.30 (−0.64; 0.04); SMD –0.47 (−1.02; 0.07); SMD –0.49 (−1.13; 0.15), respectively. For QLF, the analysis did not demonstrate significant differences between these two kinds of treatment at 1 and 6 months of use: MD 0.21 (−0.30;0.71); MD 0.60 (−1.70;2.90), but at 3 months, higher QLF values were found in the fluoride-only group compared to the CPP-ACP and fluoride combination was shown regarding the WSLs: MD 0.58 (0.25;0.91). On the contrary, data showed a small but statistically significant decrease in the lesion area in favor of the CPP-ACP plus fluoride versus fluoride alone at 6 months MD –0.38 (−0.72; −0.04). None of these observed changes indicated substantial clinical relevance. The combination of CPP-ACP and fluoride did not overcome the effect of fluoride given alone. Our data suggest that fluoride itself is effective in improving WSLs. However, the certainty of evidence was very low. These results indicate that further studies and future development of more effective products than CPP-ACP are needed in addition to fluoride to achieve robust amelioration of WSLs.

Purpose This systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) aimed to compare the accuracy of shade selection of intraoral scanners (IOSs) to spectrophotometers (SPs) as reference standards. Methods Studies comparing the trueness (percentage of the correct match and ΔE) and precision (repeatability and percentage of the same match) of IOS and SP determination were included in this study. An electronic search of five databases was conducted in May 2022. A total of 112 studies were identified from the databases, among which 22 articles were eligible for inclusion. After study selection and data extraction, MA was performed to define the accuracy of IOS in subgroups using four outcomes: the percentage of the correct match in Vita Classical shade guide system (VC), percentage of the correct match in 3D master shade guide system (3D), percentage of the correct match in VC and percentage of the same match in 3D. Cochrane guidelines, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist and GARDE were used for the risk of bias and certainty assessments. Results From the 22 articles, 10 articles were included for the MA. The percentage of the correct shade matching with IOS was 20% [confidence interval (CI): 0.05-0.52] with VC and 23% (CI: 0.06-0.59) with 3D. The repeatability of shade matching by IOSs was between 81% (CI: 0.64-0.91) with VC and 81% (CI: 0.65-0.91) with 3D master shade guide systems. Conclusions The trueness of shade matching with IOS is low compared to that with SPs, although the precision is considered high. Shade determination using IOS alone is not recommended.

Problem: Several types of 3D printers with different techniques and prices are available on the market. However, results in the literature are inconsistent, and there is no comprehensive agreement on the accuracy of 3D printers of different price categories for dental applications. Aim: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of five different 3D printing systems, including a comparison of budget- and higher-end 3D printing systems, according to a standardized production and evaluation protocol. Material and methods: A maxillary reference model with prepared teeth was created using 16 halfball markers with a diameter of 1 mm to facilitate measurements. A reference file was fabricated using five different 3D printers. The printed models were scanned and superimposed onto the original standard tesselation language (.stl) file, and digital measurements were performed to assess the 3-dimensional and linear deviations between the reference and test models. Results: After examining the entire surface of the models, we found that 3D printers using Fused filament fabrication (FFF) technology -120.2 (20.3) mu m create models with high trueness but high distortion. Distortions along the z-axis were found to be the highest with the stereolithography (SLA)-type 3D printer at -153.7 (38.7) mu m. For the 4-unit FPD, we found 201.9 (41.8) mu m deviation with the digital light processing (DLP) printer. The largest deviation (-265.1 (55.4) mu m) between the second molars was observed for the DLP printer. Between the incisor and the second molar, the best results were produced by the FFF printer with -30.5 (76.7) mu m. Conclusion: Budget-friendly 3D printers are comparable to professional-grade printers in terms of precision. In general, the cost of a printing system is not a reliable indicator of its level of accuracy.

ObjectivesTo assess the impact of including the palate and the number of images recorded during intraoral digital scanning procedure on the accuracy of complete arch scans.MethodsAn experienced operator conducted 40 digital scans of a 3D printed maxillary model and divided them into two groups: 20 with inclusion of the palate (PAL) and 20 without (NPAL). Each set of scans was performed using an intraoral scanner (IOS) (Trios 5; 3Shape A/S; Copenhagen, Denmark). The resulting STL files were imported into the Geomagic Control X software (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA) for accuracy comparison. A reference STL file was created using a 3Shape E3 laboratory scanner (3Shape Scanlt Dental 2.2.1.0; Copenhagen, Denmark). The number of images captured was recorded during the scanning procedure.ResultsIn the case of the right side no statistically significant difference in trueness was detected (84 µm ± 45.6 for PAL and 80.4 ± 40.4 µm for NPAL). In the case of the left side no significant difference in trueness was observed (215.1 ± 70.2 µm for PAL and 233.9 ± 70.7 µm for NPAL). In the case of the arch distortion a statistically significant difference in trueness was seen between the two types of scans (135.3 ±71.9 µm for PAL and 380.4 ± 255.1 µm for NPAL). The average number of images was 831.25, and 593.8 for PAL and NPAL, respectively.ConclusionsScanning of the palatal area can significantly improve the accuracy of dental scans in cases of complete arches. In terms of the number of images, based on the current results, obvious conclusions could not be drawn, and further investigation is required.Clinical SignificanceScanning the palate may be beneficial for improving the accuracy of intraoral scans in dentate patients. Consequently, this should be linked to an appropriate scanning strategy that predicts palatal scanning.

Purpose Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are frequent stomatological disorders. However, their treatment is controversial. Therefore, we compared the efficacy of combination therapy (splint therapy along with physiotherapy, manual therapy, and counseling) with physiotherapy, manual therapy, and counseling alone. The extent of mouth opening and pain perception were the outcomes.Study selection Systematic searches for English publications were performed using four major literature databases (Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science). We included randomized controlled trials. We calculated mean differences with 95% confidence interval (CI) for pain perception and maximum mouth opening (MMO) for the two groups. The Hartung-Knapp adjustment was used for cases comprising at least five studies.Results Six articles were included in the pain perception category, and four were reviewed for MMO at baseline. Four articles assessed pain perception, and two assessed MMO at 1 month. Five articles were analyzed upon comparing pain perception at baseline and 1-month follow-up. The mean difference was -2.54 [95% CI: -3.38; to -1.70] in the intervention group and -2.33 [95% CI: -4.06; to -0.61] in the control group. Two articles were analyzed upon comparing MMO at baseline and 1-month follow-up. The mean difference in the intervention group was 3.69 [95% CI: -0.34; 7.72], whereas that in the control group was 3.62 [95% CI: -3.43; 10.67].Conclusions Both therapies can be used in the management of myogenic TMD. Due to the marginal differences between the baseline and 1-month values, our results could not confirm the efficacy of combination therapy.

Purpose The aim of the present study was to determine the accuracy of Trios 5 for implant restorations in cases of multiple implant positions on full arch. Methods A fully edentulous maxillary model, with implant analogues in 16, 14, 11, 21, 24 and 26 positions, was used in this study (NC/RC Repositionable Implant Analog, Straumann). The PMMA models were digitised using the 3Shape E3 laboratory scanner (7 μm). For accuracy comparison, 10 digital impressions were taken with the 3Shape Trios 5 intraoral scanner using Cares® NC Mono Scanbodies (Straumann). The STL files were imported into the Geomagic Control X program for accuracy measurement. The measured parameters were average deviation of the scan bodies (as a group and separately) and distance measurements between the scan bodies (16-14 distance, 16-24 distance and 24-26 distance). Results In the case of average deviation, the measured data were scan bodies as a group – 155.7 µm, 16 – 42.2 µm, 14 – 33.2 µm, 11 – 133.3 µm, 21 – 158.3 µm, 24 – 175.0 µm and 26 – 280.7 µm. In the case of the distance measurements, we found the following: 16-14 distance – 39.6 µm, 16-24 distance – 140.0 µm and 24-26 distance – 47.4 µm. Conclusions Within the limitations of this current study, we can conclude that the accuracy of the Trios 5, in the case of short-span ridges, is satisfactory, but in the case of full arch implant impressions, it is inadequate.