PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 13, 2026Journal of Dentistry2 citationsOpen Access

A centripetally rotating implant scan body concept for complete-arch scanning: An in vitro study

View Full Paper
GRGennaro RuggieroRSRoberto SorrentinoFFFanny Ficuciello

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the performance of a new centripetally rotating implant scan body system for accurate complete-arch scanning.
  • Conducted in vitro testing using a maxillary resin cast with multi-unit abutments
  • Employed an industrial optical scanner for reference STL generation
  • Acquired twenty complete-arch scans with an intraoral scanner
  • Analyzed global and site-level mean deviations using rigid alignment techniques
  • Global mean deviation was measured at 0.009 mm
  • Mean deviation per multi-unit abutment was 0.010 mm
  • Translational magnitude averaged 0.064 mm
  • Angular deviation averaged 0.203°
  • Scanning time was approximately 9 seconds

Abstract

• 9 s complete-arch scans on MUAs using a rotating scanbody system • Mean global deviation: 0.009 mm; mean deviation per MUA: 0.01 mm • Mean translational magnitude: 0.064 mm • Mean angular deviation: 0.203° with low inter-scan variability • Axis components were balanced, supporting isotropic 3D pose deviations To assess the in vitro metrological performance of a centripetally rotating implant scan body (ISB) system (GeoXact®), designed to standardize scan-body orientation and create a compact concentric reference geometry to mitigate cumulative stitching drift during complete-arch implant scanning on multi-unit abutments (MUAs), and to investigate site-related effects. A maxillary resin cast with four implant sites restored with MUAs was digitized with an industrial optical scanner to generate the reference STL. GeoXact® ISBs were rotated into a centripetal contact configuration to standardize orientation and reduce inter-ISB spacing. Twenty complete-arch scans were acquired with an intraoral scanner (Primescan 2; Dentsply Sirona) by capturing only a partial portion of each ISB head (≥3 planar faces) along the contact chain. Experimental datasets were generated by CAD library replacement. Each dataset was rigidly aligned to the reference using ICP in CloudCompare (global registration). Global mean deviation was computed after global alignment; site-level mean deviations were computed under the same global transformation (no additional per-MUA best-fit), whereas per-MUA rigid alignment was used only to extract translational and angular parameters. Outcomes were global mean deviation, mean deviation per MUA, translational magnitude, angular deviation, Δ interimplant distance, and scanning time. Global mean deviation was 0.009 ±0.005 mm (n = 20). Mean deviation per MUA was 0.010 ±0.011 mm (n = 80). Translational magnitude and angular deviation averaged 0.064 ±0.092 mm and 0.203 ±0.165°, respectively. Mean Δ interimplant distance was 0.003 ±0.007 mm overall; the distal site showed the largest mean (0.008 ±0.011 mm). Mean scanning time was approximately 9 seconds. Under controlled in vitro conditions, the tested ISB workflow enabled rapid complete-arch acquisition with small 3D pose deviations on MUAs and limited site-related effects mainly at the distal implant position. In this in vitro model, the GeoXact® centripetal configuration enabled a compact reference geometry and rapid complete-arch acquisition with small metrological deviations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Ruggiero et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69b3abf602a1e69014ccd47ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2026.106623
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Effectiveness of an AI-Assisted Digital Workflow for Complete-Arch Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Comparative Study2025 · 5 citations
  2. 2Impact of Marginal Misfit in Implant‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses on Peri‐Implant Bone Levels: A Retrospective Quantitative Analysis2025 · 9 citations
  3. 3Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations: A systematic review2019 · 163 citations
  4. 4Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system2024 · 26 citations
  5. 5Techniques to improve the accuracy of complete arch implant intraoral digital scans: A systematic review2021 · 142 citations