Accuracy Of Digital Model Constructed By 5 Scanning Methods In Cerec 3D/inLab MC XL System: A Comparative Study

Objective: To compare the accuracy of the digital model constructed by 5 different scanning methods in Cerec 3D/inLab MC XL system in order to explore the best scanning method, and to provide reference for clinical use.Methods: A standard implant abutment was used as the scanning object in this experiment. Then 5 different scanning methods, including inEos Top view, inEos Rotational, inEos Top&Rot, inLab MC XL Scanner and Cerec Bluecam, was used respectively to construct the digital models of the implant abutment. The upper surface diameter, gingival margin diameter and distance from the upper surface edge to the gingival margin of the abutment and the digital models were measured respectively. The results were statistically analyzed by using SAS9.2.Results: By eye view, these constructed digital models had significantly difference. The constructed digital model by inEos Rotational had the clearest feature, such as every single line and every angle. The inEos Top view model and the Cerec Bluecam models displayed the details of axial planes not clear enough. Some undercuts were ignored, the edge was fuzzy, and some distortion existed. SNK-q pair-wise test showed that there was no significant statistical difference in the measured data from the digital models constructed by inEos Rotational and inLab MC XL Scanner with object itself (P>0·05). However, the experiment results of the other 3 scanning methods had significant difference with the results of the object (P<0·05).Conclusion: Of the 5 scanning methods of Cerec 3D/inlab MC XL system, inEos Rotational and inLab MC XL Scanner scanning can achieve more accurate digital model; the inEos Top view, combined use of inEos Top view and Rotational as well as the Cerec Bluecam are not comparatively good enough.