A literature review of the current major intraoral digital impression systems and their accuracy

Maha Mezied, Norah Alnasser, Reema Al Owaid, Rand Bakhsh, Lama Alkhudhayr, Aseel Almazyad


The accuracy of the intraoral digital impression systems has been previously reported to refer to the quality of the obtained data from the related scanning procedures, irrespective of the quality of the clinical outcomes and the estimated costs. Trueness and precision have been frequently found among studies in the literature as two terms describing the accuracy of the intraoral digital impression systems. Various digital impression modalities have been proposed among studies in the literature and were investigated for estimation of their accuracy. The paper aims to review and discuss the most common literature regarding the current common systems and their accuracy among the different studies in the literature. According to the results, Chairside Economical Restoration of Esthetic Ceramic (CEREC) systems appear to have the highest estimated rates of trueness and precision as compared to the other modalities while the iTero system appears to have the lowest estimated rates. However, some studies have reported contradicting results and the current evidence is mainly based on findings from in vitro investigations. Accordingly, further studies might be needed for further validation of the current evidence and strengthening the quality of the future potential implications for clinicians.



Dentistry, Digital impression, Scanning, Accuracy, Validation

Full Text:



Kim RJ, Park JM, Shim JS. Accuracy of 9 intraoral scanners for complete-arch image acquisition: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(6):895-903.

Zimmermann M, Mehl A, Mormann WH, Reich S. Intraoral scanning systems- a current overview. Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(2):101-29.

Keul C, Stawarczyk B, Erdelt KJ, Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Guth JF. Fit of 4-unit FDPs made of zirconia and CoCr-alloy after chairside and labside digitalization--a laboratory study. Dent Mater. 2014;30(4):400-7.

Svanborg P, Skjerven H, Carlsson P, Eliasson A, Karlsson S, Ortorp A. Marginal and internal fit of cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses generated from digital and conventional impressions. Int J Dent. 2014;534382.

Ahrberg D, Lauer HC, Ahrberg M, Weigl P. Evaluation of fit and efficiency of CAD/CAM fabricated all-ceramic restorations based on direct and indirect digitalization: a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(2):291-300.

Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):92.

Kravitz ND, Groth C, Jones PE, Graham JW, Redmond WR. Intraoral digital scanners. J Clin Orthod. 2014;48(6):337-47.

Galhano GA, Pellizzer EP, Mazaro JV. Optical impression systems for CAD-CAM restorations. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(6):575-9.

Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions--an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):11-21.

Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(6):1687-94.

Patzelt SB, Vonau S, Stampf S, Att W. Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013;144(8):914-20.

Patzelt SB, Bishti S, Stampf S, Att W. Accuracy of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing-generated dental casts based on intraoral scanner data. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(11):1133-40.

Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique: A Review. J Prosthodont. 2015;24(4):313-21.

Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent. 2010;38(7):553-9.

Birnbaum N, Aaranson HA, Stephens C, Cohen B. 3D Digital Scanners: A High-Tech Approach to More Accurate Dental Impressions. Inside Dent. 2009;5.

Birnbaum NS, Aaronson HB. Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2008;29(8):494.

Ender A, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(3):313-20.

Hack G, Sebastian BMP. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Six Intraoral Scanning Devices: An in-vitro Investigation. Sematic Scholar. 2015.

Jeong ID, Lee JJ, Jeon JH, Kim JH, Kim HY, Kim WC. Accuracy of complete-arch model using an intraoral video scanner: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(6):755-9.

Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(1):36-42.

Lee JJ, Jeong ID, Park JY, Jeon JH, Kim JH, Kim WC. Accuracy of single-abutment digital cast obtained using intraoral and cast scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(2):253-9.

Kim JE, Amelya A, Shin Y, Shim JS. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(6):755-61.

Kuhr F, Schmidt A, Rehmann P, Wostmann B. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients. J Dent. 2016;55:68-74.

Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod. 2016;46(1):3-12.

Lee KM. Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis. Prog Orthod. 2018;19(1):6.

Rehmann P, Sichwardt V, Wostmann B. Intraoral Scanning Systems: Need for Maintenance. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(1):27-9.

Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int. 2015;46(1):9-17.