Introduction: In recent years, the use of intraoral scanners in the fabrication of fixed implant-supported restorations has become widespread in modern dental implantology. To register the position and angulation of implants in the oral cavity using an intraoral scanner, implant scan bodies (ISBs), are utilized.
The aim is to evaluate the influence of ISB material on the accuracy of the digital impression.
Materials and Methods: Articles related to the topic were searched in databases such as Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect, using various keyword combinations. Only full-text articles in English, published between 2019 and 2024, were included.
Results: The articles included in this study are clinical and experimental research as well as several literature reviews. The studies examine the impact of different materials—titanium (Ti), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), PEEK-Ti—used to manufacture ISBs.
Conclusion: The material from which ISBs are made plays a crucial role in scan accuracy. Differences in materials, such as titanium (Ti) versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK), have been identified as influencing factors. The findings show that the lowest deviations in the accuracy of the digital impression of the implant prosthetic area are achieved by using ISBs made of PEEK, followed by Ti ISBs, with the greatest deviation observed in ISBs made from PEEK-Ti.
Althubaitiy R, Sambrook R, Weisbloom M. The accuracy of digital implant impressions when using and varying the material and diameter of the dental implant scan bodies. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent.2022;30(4):305–13.
Alvarez C, Domínguez P, Jiménez-Castellanos E, Arroyo G, Orozco A. How the geometry of the scan body affects the accuracy of digital impressions in implant-supported prosthesis. In vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent.2022;14–14.
Arcuri L, Pozzi A, Lio F, Rompen Е, Zechner W, Nardi A. Influence of implant scanbody material, position and operator on the accuracy of digital impression for complete-arch: A randomized in vitro trial. Journal of Prosthodontic Research 64(2) May 2019 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.06.001.
Di Fiore, A., Vigolo, P., Graiff, L. & Stellini, E. Digital versus conventional workflow for screw-retained single-implant crowns: A comparison of key considerations. Int. J. Prosthodont. 31, 577–579. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5938 (2018).
Donmez MB, Çakmak G, Yilmaz B, Revilla-León M. Influence of implant scan body design (height, diameter, geometry, material, and retention system) on intraoral scanning accuracy: A systematic review. J Prosthodont.2023 Dec;32(S2):165-180. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13774. Epub 2023 Oct 18. PMID:37771200.
García-Martínez I, Zarauz C, Morejón B, Ferreiroa A, Pradíes G. Influence of customized over-scan body rings on the intraoral scanning effectiveness of a multiple implant edentulous mandibular model. J Dent.2022;122:104095.
Huang R, Liu Y, Huang B, Zhou F, Chen Z, Li Z. Improved accuracy of digital implant impressions with newly designed scan bodies: an in vivo evaluation in beagle dogs. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21: 1–9.
Lawand G, Ismail Y, Revilla-León M, Tohme H. Effect of implant scan body geometric modifications on the trueness and scanning time of complete arch intraoral implant digital scans: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent.2022 Jul 18 (22)00378-X. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.06.004.
Lee J-H, Bae J-H, Lee SY. Trueness of digital implant impressions based on implant angulation and scan body materials. Sci Rep. 2021;11:21892.
Li H, Lyu P, Wang Y, Sun Y. Influence of object translucency on the scanning accuracy of a powder-free intraoral scanner: a laboratory study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117:93–101. Meneghetti PC, Li J, Borella PS, Mendonça G, Burnett LH Jr. Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study. PLoS ONE. 18(12): e0295790. (2023)
Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B, Mcglumphy EA, Seidt J, Johnston WM. Accuracy of different digital scanning techniques and scan bodies for complete-arch implant-supported prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123:96–104.
Mizumoto RM, Yilmaz B. Intraoral scan bodies in implant dentistry: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent.2018;120:343–52.
Moslemion M, Payaminia L, Jalali H. Do type and shape of scan bodies affect accuracy and time of digital implant impressions? Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2020;28:18–27.
Motel C, Kirchner E, Adler W, Wichmann M, Matta RE. Impact of different scan bodies and scan strategies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions assessed with an intraoral scanner: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2020;29:309–14.
Pan Y, Tsoi JKH, Lam WYH, Chen Z, Pow EHN. Does the geometry of scan bodies affect the alignment accuracy of computer-aided design in implant digital workflow: an in vitro study? Clin Oral Implants Res.2022;33:313–21.
Pozzi A, Arcuri L, Lio F, Papa A, Nardi A, Londono J. Accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impression with or without scanbody splinting: an in vitro study. J Dent. 2022;119:104072.
Revilla-León M, Fogarty R, Barrington JJ, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. Influence of scan body design and digital implant analogs on implant replica position in additively manufactured casts. J Prosthet Dent.2020;124:202–10.
Revilla-León M, Smith Z, Methani MM, Zandinejad A, Özcan M. Influence of scan body design on accuracy of the implant position as transferred to a virtual definitive implant cast. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125:918–23.
Schmidt A, Billig J-W, Schlenz M, Wöstmann B. The influence of using different types of scan bodies on the transfer accuracy of implant position: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2021;34:254–60.
Wulfman C, Naveau A, Rignon-Bret C. Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124(2):161–7. Epub 2019/11/24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.014. PMID:31757443.
Yilmaz B, Gouveia D, Marques VR, Diker E, Schimmel M, AbouAyash S. The accuracy of single implant scans with a healing abutment-scanpeg system compared with the scans of a scanbody and conventional impressions: an in vitro study. J Dent. 2021;110:103684.
