Three-dimensional analysis of the accuracy of conventional and completely digital interocclusal registration methods

Compared with the frequent investigations into the accuracy of digital intraoral scans, studies analyzing digital determinations of jaw relationships based on intraoral scans are scarce.The purpose of this in vitro study was to present an optical 3-dimensional method for analyzing deviations in static occlusion and to compare the accuracy of conventional and digital interocclusal registrations.A Frasaco jaw model was duplicated, articulated, and scanned with a high-precision industrial scanner, and the data were stored in a virtual standard tessellation language (STL) format, which served as the reference model. Fifteen paired mandibular and maxillary models were scanned with a digital intraoral scanner in the completely digital workflow (IOS group). Forty-five paired gypsum casts were poured from polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions and associated with 2 different PVS registration materials. These casts were digitized with a laboratory scanner and grouped as follows (n=15/group): PVS group, conventional Futar D interocclusal record; sPVS group, conventional Futar Scan interocclusal record; and the AIR group, partially digital antagonist scan of the Futar Scan interocclusal record. The axes (X, Y, Z, and XYZ) of each paired model were aligned to those of the reference model by 3-dimensional superimposition, and deviations were calculated. To determine the ideal zero position, a best-fit over the mandibular teeth between the reference model and the actual model was estimated. Next, a second best-fit was determined between the maxillary models to determine the actual position of the mandibular model. The different registration methods were compared with the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).In the IOS group, the interocclusal registration caused a mandibular deviation of 0.05 ±0.04 mm (mean ±standard deviation). This fit was better than those of conventional registrations with inserted interocclusal registration materials (PVS group and sPVS group), which caused mean z-axis deviations of 0.41 ±0.46 mm and 0.44 ±0.32 mm (P<.001), with the deviations leading to elevation of the mandibular model. The partially digital workflow with a scannable registration material (AIR group) showed significantly larger deviations in the x-axis (0.15 ±0.08 mm; P=.042) compared with the IOS group. No significant difference was observed in the total deviation between the IOS and the AIR groups. Both groups showed significantly smaller deviations than the conventional registration methods (P<.001 for the IOS group and P=.023 for the AIR group).In comparison with maxillary and mandibular alignment using conventional interocclusal registration materials, digital interocclusal registrations showed greater accuracy in evaluating complete jaw models and can be recommended for clinical use. Additionally, the partially digital workflow with an antagonist scan of the interocclusal record provided acceptable results.