Objectives This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of two intraoral scanners at different post space preparation depths and widths for CAD/CAM fabricated post and core fabrication. Methods A total of 36 extracted anterior teeth were used in this study, which were divided into 6 groups according to the different widths and depths of post space preparations. Two operators carried out the intraoral scanning using two scanners: Planmeca Emerald and 3Shape TRIOS 4. Furthermore, the inEos X5 extraoral laboratory scanner was used as a reference. 3D point cloud processing software was used to analyze the impact of different widths and depths on the scanners' accuracy. Results After ensuring examiner blinding, it showed that there was no significant difference between the 3Shape and Planmeca scanners. Additionally, longer posts resulted in lower scanning accuracy across the board, whereas wider posts tended to produce results that were more accurate. Conclusions This study found that there was no difference in accuracy between the 3Shape and Planmeca scanners. The distribution of scanning accuracy at different post space preparation depths and widths showed that longer posts resulted in lower scanning accuracy, whereas wider posts tended to produce results that were more accurate, which provides information for the CAD/CAM post and core fabrication.
Rokaya et al. (Wed,) studied this question.