Accuracy of the maxillomandibular relationship at centric relation position recorded by using 3 different intraoral scanners with or without an optical jaw tracking system: An in vivo pilot study

To measure the accuracy (trueness and precision) of the maxillomandibular relationship at centric relation position recorded by using 3 different intraoral scanners with or without an optical jaw tracking system. A completely dentate volunteer was selected. Seven groups were generated: conventional procedure (control group), 3 IOSs: Trios4 (Trios4 group), Itero Element 5D Plus (Itero group), i700 (i700 group), and 3 groups with a jaw tracking system for each corresponding IOS system (Modjaw-Trios4, Modjaw-iTero, and Modjaw-i700 groups) (n = 10). In the control group, casts were mounted on an articulator (Panadent) using a face bow and a CR record captured with the Kois deprogrammer (KD). The casts were digitized by using a scanner (T710) (control files). In the Trios4 group, intraoral scans were obtained by using the corresponding IOS and duplicated 10 times. The KD was used to obtain a bilateral occlusal record at CR position. These same procedures were followed for the Itero and i700 groups. In the Modjaw-Trios 4 group, the intraoral scans acquired by using the corresponding IOS at MIP were imported into the jaw tracking program. The KD was used to record the CR relationship. For acquiring the specimens in the Modjaw-Itero and Modjaw-i700 groups, the same procedures were followed as in the Modjaw-Trios4 group, with the scans obtained with the Itero and i700 scanners respectively. The articulated virtual casts of each group were exported. Thirty-six inter-landmark linear measurements were used to calculate the discrepancies between the control and experimental scans. The data were analyzed by using 2-way ANOVA followed the pairwise comparison Tukey tests (α=0.05). Significant trueness and precision discrepancies were found among the groups tested (P<.001). The Modjaw-i700, Modjaw-iTero, Modjaw-Trios4, and i700 groups obtained the best trueness and precision among the groups tested, and the iTero and Trios4 groups obtained the worst trueness. The iTero group obtained the worst precision among the groups tested (P>.05). The maxillomandibular relationship recorded was influenced by the technique selected. Except for the i700 IOS system, the optical jaw tracking system tested improved the trueness value of the maxillomandibular relationship recorded at CR position when compared with the corresponding IOS.