Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accuracy and precision of intraoral scanners (IOSs) are critical factors for achieving a passive fit in implant-supported hybrid prostheses (ISHP). However, limited evidence is available regarding the comparative performance of different IOSs in complete-arch implant cases. This in vitro study aimed to simultaneously evaluate and compare the trueness and repeatability of six contemporary IOS systems in capturing mandibular ISHP impressions. METHODS: A mandibular acrylic model with five implant analogs was scanned using an industrial scanner (Zeiss Comet 6) to obtain a reference dataset. Six IOSs (Primescan, Trios 4, Trios 3, Medit i500, Virtuo Vivo, and Emerald S) were each used to scan the model five times by a single operator under controlled laboratory conditions. All test scans were superimposed on the reference using Geomagic Control X software, and root mean square (RMS) values were calculated to assess accuracy. Precision was determined using the coefficient of variation (CV). Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Games–Howell post-hoc tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Significant differences were observed among scanners (p < 0.05). Primescan exhibited the highest trueness (0.0411 ± 0.0058 mm), followed by Trios 4 and Trios 3, whereas Emerald S demonstrated the lowest trueness (0.056 ± 0.0068 mm). The Trios 3 demonstrated the greatest repeatability (CV = 0.021), while Virtuo Vivo exhibited the lowest (CV = 0.179). CONCLUSION: Scanner selection significantly influences digital impression accuracy for ISHP. The Primescan and Trios systems provided superior trueness and precision, respectively, highlighting their clinical advantage in full-arch implant rehabilitations. Clinicians should consider the optical technology and demonstrated performance of IOSs when integrating digital workflows for complex implant-supported restorations.