Comparison of 3D extraoral scanning of artex articulator scan vs scan fixator in a fully edentulous arch – in-vitro study

BACKGROUND: This in vitro study compared the precision of articulator-based scanning and scan fixator-based scanning in completely edentulous arches with implant scan bodies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Upper and lower master casts were fabricated from a typodont, and six implant replicas were placed in each arch. Final impressions were used to fabricate master casts, which were subsequently mounted on an Artex articulator. Implant scan bodies were attached during the digital scanning procedures. Two scanning protocols were evaluated: (1) casts mounted on an Artex articulator and (2) casts mounted using a scan fixator. Each configuration was scanned ten times using an extraoral desktop scanner, and all scans were exported as STL files. Precision was evaluated using CloudCompare software by performing pairwise superimpositions within each group. Root mean square (RMS) values were calculated from all pairwise comparisons to assess intra-group variability. RESULTS: A total of 45 pairwise comparisons per group were analyzed. RMS values showed high variability and right-skewed distributions. The scan fixator showed a mean RMS of 106.6 ± 206.8 μm (median 17.9 μm), while the articulator showed 178.9 ± 276.5 μm (median 22.2 μm). No significant difference was found between groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p = .446) or the paired t-test on log-transformed data (p = .334). After excluding 20 outlier pairs, results remained unchanged (p > .4 for both tests). Overall, both systems demonstrated comparable precision with no statistically significant differences in RMS values. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in precision between articulator-based scanning and scan fixator-based scanning in edentulous arches with implant scan bodies. The scan fixator may represent a cost-effective and clinically acceptable alternative in digital implant workflows.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Oral Health
Published
2026-04-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-026-08476-3
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of 3D extraoral scanning of artex articulator scan vs scan fixator in a fully edentulous arch – in-vitro study

Walaa A. Babeer, Abdulrahman Jafar Alhaddad, Turki S. Alkhallagi, Badr K Alshammari et al.
BMC Oral Health
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

Comparison of 3D extraoral scanning of artex articulator scan vs scan fixator in a fully edentulous arch – in-vitro study

Walaa A. Babeer, Abdulrahman Jafar Alhaddad, Turki S. Alkhallagi, Badr K Alshammari, Thamer Y Marghalani, Khadijah M Baik
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This in vitro study compared the precision of articulator-based scanning and scan fixator-based scanning in completely edentulous arches with implant scan bodies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Upper and lower master casts were fabricated from a typodont, and six implant replicas were placed in each arch. Final impressions were used to fabricate master casts, which were subsequently mounted on an Artex articulator. Implant scan bodies were attached during the digital scanning procedures. Two scanning protocols were evaluated: (1) casts mounted on an Artex articulator and (2) casts mounted using a scan fixator. Each configuration was scanned ten times using an extraoral desktop scanner, and all scans were exported as STL files. Precision was evaluated using CloudCompare software by performing pairwise superimpositions within each group. Root mean square (RMS) values were calculated from all pairwise comparisons to assess intra-group variability. RESULTS: A total of 45 pairwise comparisons per group were analyzed. RMS values showed high variability and right-skewed distributions. The scan fixator showed a mean RMS of 106.6 ± 206.8 μm (median 17.9 μm), while the articulator showed 178.9 ± 276.5 μm (median 22.2 μm). No significant difference was found between groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p = .446) or the paired t-test on log-transformed data (p = .334). After excluding 20 outlier pairs, results remained unchanged (p > .4 for both tests). Overall, both systems demonstrated comparable precision with no statistically significant differences in RMS values. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in precision between articulator-based scanning and scan fixator-based scanning in edentulous arches with implant scan bodies. The scan fixator may represent a cost-effective and clinically acceptable alternative in digital implant workflows.

BMC Oral Health
King Abdulaziz University (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.