###### Abstract  
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, Mediti 1700, Cerec Omnicam and Plammeca 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 Mediti i700 group displayed the best level of trueness with the median value of 23.25 um, PrimeScan group with a median of 25.55 um, Omnicam group with a median of 32.3 um and the PlanScan group which displayed the lowest level of trueness with a median value of 75.8 um. From the precision data analysis, it was concluded that the PrimeScan group showed the best results, followed by Mediti 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.  
intraoral scanner; trueness; precision; accuracy; fixed dental prostheses Article  
Is There a Significant Difference in Accuracy of Four Intraoral Scanners for Short-Span Fixed Dental Prosthesis?  
A Comparative In Vitro Study  
1 TADERP Research Center, Department of Prosthodotics, University of Medicine and Pharmacy \"[PERSON]\", B-dul Revolutiet 1989, No. 9, 300580 Timsoara, Romania; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (A.J.); [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (R.N.R.)  
2 Department of Prosthodotics, University of Medicine and Pharmacy \"[PERSON]\", B-dul Revolutiet 1989, No. 9, 300580 Timsoara, Romania; [EMAIL_ADDRESS] (Correspondence: [EMAIL_ADDRESS]; Tel: +40-744673091 21) 2  
###### Abstract  
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, Mediti 1700, Cerec Omnicam and Plammeca 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 Mediti i700 group displayed the best level of trueness with the median value of 23.25 um, PrimeScan group with a median of 25.55 um, Omnicam group with a median of 32.3 um and the PlanScan group which displayed the lowest level of trueness with a median value of 75.8 um. From the precision data analysis, it was concluded that the PrimeScan group showed the best results, followed by Mediti 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.  
Keywords:intraoral scanner; trueness; precision; accuracy; fixed dental prostheses +
Footnote †: journal: