19 July 2026 : Laboratory Research
Influence of Scan Body Geometry, Implant Angulation, and Interimplant Distance on the Accuracy of Maxillary Full-Arch Digital Implant Scans: An In Vitro Study
Ebru Sümer Ekin
ABCDEF 1*, Sozdar Başkan Uyar BCD 2, Merve Güler BFG 2, Emrah Ayna ACG 2
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.953734
Med Sci Monit 2026; 32:e953734
Table 2 Comparison of 3-dimensional deviation values according to interimplant distance.
| Implant position | Group | Mean ± SD | Min–Max | Multiple comparisons (Tukey HSD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Implant 1 (10 mm)F = 14.842 < 0.004 | (1) Bioinfinity | 9.875± 0.766 | 8.463–10.879 | (2)(3) |
| (2) Mode | 11.108± 0.429 | 10.328–11.695 | (1) | |
| (3) Meisinger | 10.895± 0.326 | 10.354–11.283 | (1) | |
| Implant 2 (10 mm)F = 15.380 < 0.001 | (1) Bioinfinity | 10.536± 0.549 | 9.222–11.023 | (2)(3) |
| (2) Mode | 11.182± 0.331 | 10.729–11.711 | (1) | |
| (3) Meisinger | 11.542± 0.309 | 10.843–11.829 | (1) | |
| Implant 4 (5 mm)F = 0.690 = 0.510 | (1) Bioinfinity | 6.016± 0.778 | 4.917–7.380 | ns |
| (2) Mode | 6.187± 0.292 | 5.731–6.736 | ns | |
| (3) Meisinger | 6.264± 0.105 | 6.128–6.470 | ns | |
| Implant 5 (5 mm)F = 27.822 < 0.001 | (1) Bioinfinity | 5.543± 0.703 | 4.314–6.623 | (2)(3) |
| (2) Mode | 6.536± 0.296 | 6.043–6.863 | (1)(3) | |
| (3) Meisinger | 6.995± 0.108 | 6.796–7.163 | (1)(2) | |
| One-way ANOVA was used for statistical analysis, followed by Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc test for multiple comparisons. Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Numbers in parentheses indicate groups with statistically significant differences according to Tukey HSD test ( < 0.05). n = 10 per group. “ns” indicates no statistically significant difference ( > 0.05). | ||||