Intraoral scanners (IOS) have reached a point where their impact in the dental office cannot be denied. The distance between the tip of the IOS and the preparation may have implications on the accuracy of the digital model. The objective of this study was to evaluate the differences in accuracy between digital impressions in the scenario of different scanning distances. Twenty consecutive scans were performed at five predetermined distances: 5 mm, 10 mm, 15 mm, 20 mm and 23 mm by a single operator. The scanning distance of 10 mm displayed the best accuracy with an overall trueness value of 23.05 μm and precision value of 4.2 μm. The drawn conclusion was that increased scanning distances can decrease the accuracy of a digital impression.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different settings of ambient light intensity inside the dental office on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner (IOS). A full crown preparation was conducted on a resin molar which was scanned using a high resolution extraoral scanner to obtain a reference model. Six light settings were chosen based on the most clinically relevant light conditions inside the workspace, and the preparation was scanned using an intraoral scanner (PlanScan, Planmeca). The obtained data was analyzed using a professional 3D quality control software (Geomagic Control X). There was no statistically relevant difference between the groups when regarding trueness, although a slight influence of the light intensity could be observed on the trueness values. Regarding precision, the best results were obtained in the 3800 lux group, with the other groups presenting close values, excepting the extreme values (400 lux and 11 000 lux) groups that proved to be the most deficient.

All-ceramic restorations are the foundation of modern restorative aesthetic dentistry. The industry for dental materials now provides a large selection of biomaterials with a range of constantly improving qualities. Although this is undoubtedly advantageous, the vast array of materials may confuse even experienced dentists. Even if recently the demand of digital dentistry in daily dental practice has significantly increased, due to a lack of understanding concerning cementation techniques, which are different for each type of ceramic used, dentists are continuing to be hesitant to utilise these various CAD/CAM materials. This study analysed 58 articles from 2008 to 2025, focusing on narrative, comprehensive, and systematic reviews and in vitro studies on dental dentistry materials. English articles were included, but non-English articles and case reports were excluded. The analysis included articles from all journal categories, ensuring adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The aim of the research is to assess material classifications and properties that guide practices concerning the adhesive cementation of all-ceramic restorations. In order to provide a clear overview of the composition, characteristics, clinical considerations, and current trends of contemporary dental materials, as well as some recommendations for future research in this area that would be relevant to dentists and the scientific community, the authors of the paper were guided by this structure when writing the article content. The key is to ensure the aesthetics, resistance, and long-term clinical success of the treatment plan by providing dental professionals with clear, accurate information and instructions about resin-luting materials and indirect restoration materials.

Is the accuracy of the older generation of IOSs an impediment for obtaining a quality intraoral digital impression? The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in accuracy between four intraoral scanners (two of the latest IOSs and two older IOSs) in the scenario of a short span fixed partial denture, and to determine if these differences have a major impact on the quality of the final digital impression. Four intraoral scanners: Cerec PrimeScan, Medit i700, Cerec Omnicam and Planmeca PlanScan and one laboratory scanner were used in this study. The scanned data were processed with the help of Geomagic Control X, a metrology software. For the statistical data analysis, the level of significance was set as 0.05 ($\alpha$ = 0.05). The Medit i700 group displayed the best level of trueness with the median value of 23.25 µm, PrimeScan group with a median of 25.55 µm, Omnicam group with a median of 32.3 µm and the PlanScan group which displayed the lowest level of trueness with a median value of 75.8 µm. From the precision data analysis, it was concluded that the PrimeScan group showed the best results, followed by Medit i700, Omnicam and the PlanScan group which showed the lowest precision. Even if there are some significant differences in accuracy between old and new IOSs, in the in vitro scenario of short span dental prostheses, the accuracy values were within the clinically acceptable range and may present important clinical implications.

Introduction. Provisional dental prostheses are used as interim restorations to help patients perform oral functions between the time of tooth preparation and the placement of the final restoration. A provisional dental prosthesis should protect the abutment from pulpal and gingival aggressions, adapt correctly to keep healthy gingival tissues, be durable, and have a low price. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the marginal adaptation of different types of provisional fixed dental prostheses (PFDP), fabricated using 3D printing technology versus the milling (computer-aided manufacturing [CAM]) technique. Method. Two resin teeth (second premolar and second molar) on a typodont were prepared for three-unit provisional fixed dental prostheses. Thirty models were 3D-printed after a digital model was created using an intraoral scanner. Then, 30 provisional fixed dental prostheses (PFDPs) were made from a variety of materials using a digital design of a 3-unit PFDP and STL files delivered to a milling machine and a 3D printer, respectively. Ten PFDP were milled (CAM), and two sets of ten each, were fabricated with 3D printing technology (stereolithography), using two different materials. All restorations were analyzed under a microscope, and marginal gap was then measured using the software Image J. Results. The milled group presented the best marginal gap values (ranging from 86 to 108 μm) and a median value of 93 μm, followed by GC group with (110-251 μm) with a median value of 205 μm and the PR group with median value of 316.5 μm. Conclusion. According to the findings of this in vitro study, the milling (CAM) technique and SLA technology provides acceptable marginal fit values to fabricate provisional fixed partial dentures.

Dentistry is steadily evolving along the digital pathway at a constant and sure pace. Intraoral scanners (IOSs) started to enhance the precision and trueness of the restorations, making prosthodontics treatment more predictable. The objective of this study was to compare the trueness and internal fit of the printed provisional veneers for 60 preparations with three different types of finish lines. The abutments were scanned with the same intraoral scanner, and the resulting meshes were overlapped and analyzed in metrology software. The comparison was executed using two methods: (1) CAD (computer-aided design) designs vs. scanned veneers and (2) inverted surfaces of the preparations vs. scanned veneers. The butt joint preparation had the best trueness out of the three groups of preparation during both comparison methods, although there was no statistically significant difference between the butt joint and feather edge groups in the CAD design vs. scanned veneers analysis. Also, there was no statistically significant difference between palatal chamfer and feather edge groups in the scanned veneers vs. inverted surfaces of the preparations analysis.