Veracidade, usabilidade e relação custo-performance de 15 escâneres intraorais na aquisição de imagens de prótese sobre implantes: estudo comparativo in-vitro de tecnologias da próxima geração

Abstract

This in vitro comparative study aimed to provide an integrated evaluation of 15 intraoral scanners (IOSs), correlating their performance in implant-supported prostheses with operational feasibility and cost-performance to support decision-making in digital implant dentistry. A partially edentulous mandibular model was prepared with two Helix GM implants and scanned using a laboratory scanner inEos X5 as the reference standard and 15 IOSs (Primescan, Omnicam, Virtuo Vivo, Sirios, Sirios x3, Medit i600, Medit i900, Trios 3, Trios 5, Aoralscan 3, CS 3600, CS3800W, iTero Element 5D, iTero Lumina and Eagle Scan) (n=10). Trueness was evaluated by 3D mesh superimposition over the reference model. Usability was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and cost-performance was analyzed based on cos and technical characteristics. Accuracy data was statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc tests (α=0.05). Significant differences in accuracy were observed among IOSs (p<0.001). All IOSs showed clinically acceptable performance except iTero Element (101µm [22.3-188µm]) and Virtuo Vivo (92.9 µm [56.8-152 µm]). Trios 5 showed the lowest deviation and interquartile range (32.5µm [30.5–38.4µm]), while Sirios x3 exhibited significant statistically difference among several IOSs. The mean SUS score was 90 (±12). Cost-performance analysis revealed variability among IOSs, with no clear proportional relationship between cost, IOS type, and performance. Despite differences in performance during scanbody acquisition, most IOSs demonstrated clinically acceptable accuracy for implant-supported prostheses, with Trios 5 showing the lowest median RMS value. These findings highlight that IOS selection should be based on an integrated assessment of performance, usability, and cost-performance.