Statement of problem
Alternatives to the bilateral interocclusal registration scanning technique to improve virtual articulation have not been fully investigated.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of virtually articulating digital casts by using bilateral interocclusal registration scans versus a complete arch interocclusal scan.
Material and methods
A set of maxillary and mandibular reference casts were hand-articulated and mounted on an articulator. The mounted reference casts were scanned, and the maxillomandibular relationship record was scanned 15 times using 2 different scanning techniques, the bilateral interocclusal registration scan (BIRS) and complete arch interocclusal registration scan (CIRS), with an intraoral scanner. The generated files were transferred to a virtual articulator, and each set of scanned casts was articulated using BIRS and CIRS. The virtually articulated casts were saved as a set and transferred to a 3-dimensional (3D) analysis program. The scanned casts were set in the same coordinate system as the reference cast and overlaid on top of the reference cast for analysis. Two anterior and 2 posterior points were selected to determine points of comparison between the reference cast and test casts virtually articulated with BIRS and CIRS. The mean discrepancy between the 2 test groups and the anterior and posterior mean discrepancy within each group were tested for significance by using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).
A significant difference was found between the virtual articulation accuracy of BIRS and CIRS (P<.001). The mean deviation for BIRS was 0.053 ±0.051 mm and that for CIRS was 0.265 ±0.241 mm. Furthermore, significant differences were found between the anterior and posterior deviations in both BIRS (P=.020) and CIRS (P<.001). The mean deviation for BIRS was 0.034 ±0.026 mm in the anterior and 0.073 ±0.062 mm in the posterior. The mean deviation for CIRS was 0.146 ±0.108 mm anteriorly and 0.385 ±0.277 mm posteriorly.
BIRS was more accurate than CIRS for virtual articulation. Moreover, the alignment accuracy of anterior and posterior sites for both BIRS and CIRS exhibited significant differences, with the anterior alignment exhibiting better accuracy in relation to the reference cast.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Digital impressions--easier than ever.Int J Comput Dent. 2009; 12: 47-52
- Virtual facebow technique.J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 751-755
- Virtual articulator for the analysis of dental occlusion: an update.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012; 17: e160-e163
- Accuracy of dynamic virtual articulation: trueness and precision.J Prosthodont. 2019; 28: 436-443
- Comparative study of mechanical properties of dental restorative materials and dental hard tissues in compressive loads.J Dent Biomech. 2014; 51758736014555246
- Novel biomaterials and technologies for the dental, oral, and craniofacial structures.J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 1185-1186
- Comparison of a conventional and virtual occlusal record.J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114: 92-97
- Virtual articulators and virtual mounting procedures: Where do we stand?.J Prosthodont. 2021; 30: 24-35
- The accuracy of virtual interocclusal registration during intraoral scanning.J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 120: 904-912
- Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review.J Prosthodont. 2018; 27: 35-41
- Simulation of dental collisions and occlusal dynamics in the virtual environment.J Oral Rehabil. 2016; 43: 269-278
- Digital recording of a conventionally determined centric relation: a technique using an intraoral scanner.J Prosthet Dent. 2020; 123: 228-231
- [Effect of digital intraoral full-arch scan strategies on scan time and accuracy on conditions of intraoral head-simulator].Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2021; 56: 1092-1097
- Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners.Clin Oral Investig. 2014; 18: 1687-1694
- Three-dimensional accuracy of digital static interocclusal registration by three intraoral scanner systems.J Prosthodont. 2018; 27: 120-128
- Digital cross-mounting: a new opportunity in prosthetic dentistry.Quintessence Int. 2017; 48: 701-709
- Accuracy of contacts calculated from 3D images of occlusal surfaces.J Dent. 2007; 35: 528-534
- Comparing maximum intercuspal contacts of virtual dental patients and mounted dental casts.J Prosthet Dent. 2002; 88: 622-630
- Three-dimensional analysis of the accuracy of conventional and completely digital interocclusal registration methods.J Prosthet Dent. 19 April 2021; ([Epub ahead of print.])https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.03.005
- Determining the requirements, section quantity, and dimension of the virtual occlusal record.J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115: 52-56
Published online: February 20, 2023
Publication stageIn Press Corrected Proof
Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
© 2023 by the Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.