Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
Statement of problem: Intraoral scanners (IOSs) have been widely used for the digital fabrication of 1-piece endodontic crowns, but the effect of pulp chamber geometry associated with chamber depth and axial wall configuration on scan accuracy performed with different IOSs is not yet clear. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of pulp chamber design and IOS type on the accuracy of digital scans for 1-piece endodontic crown preparations. Material and methods: Four experimental models (A3, A5, NA3, and NA5) were prepared with 2 pulp chamber depths (3 and 5 mm) and 2 axial wall configurations (with or without axial walls). Each model was scanned 11 times with 2 different IOSs (TRIOS 5; 3Shape and iTero Element 5D; Align Technology), yielding 88 scans. A metrology-grade desktop scanner was used to obtain reference scans. Trueness was assessed via the 3-dimensional (3D) comparison (Geomagic Control X 2022.3;3D Systems) of reference scans and test scans by using the root mean square (RMS) method. Two-way nonparametric factorial analysis of variance ANOVA with the aligned-rank transform (ART) was used to examine the effects of factors and their interactions. Post hoc pairwise comparisons were performed using the estimated marginal means (EMMs) of the aligned ranks with Bonferroni correction (α=.05). Results: Pulp chamber geometry associated with chamber depth and axial wall configuration–scanner combinations led to significant differences in scan trueness (P<.001). The lowest RMS values were observed when the axial wall was present (A3 and A5) and scanned with iTero (15.7 ±1.3 and 17.2 ±2.7 µm), whereas the highest RMS was observed when a no axial wall situation (NA3) was scanned with TRIOS (34.3 ±3.7 µm). iTero enabled a significantly lower mean RMS value than TRIOS in the NA3 situation (P≤.001). When the iTero was used, the NA3 scans exhibited significantly higher RMS values than the A3, A5, and NA5 (P≤.008). When the TRIOS was used, the NA5 and A5 scans exhibited significantly lower RMS values than the NA3 scans (P≤.006). The main effect of pulp chamber geometry on the precision of the scan data was found to be statistically significant (F=3.47, P=.020). Conclusions: The pulp chamber geometry and the interaction between the scanner and the pulp chamber geometry affected the accuracy of scans. Axial wall presence tended to result in higher scan trueness, and iTero scanner enabled higher trueness than TRIOS for the scan of a shallow preparation with no axial wall.