{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T07:59:47Z","timestamp":1790236787264,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":35,"publisher":"Wiley","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790208000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1790208000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/doi.wiley.com\/10.1002\/tdm_license_1.1"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Journal of Prosthodontics"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To compare the trueness of four techniques for complete\u2010arch implant position acquisition: intraoral implant scanning (IOIS) using auxiliary geometric devices (AGDs), IOIS using horizontally extended noncalibrated scanbodies (NCSBs), smartphone\u2010based extraoral photogrammetry (EPG), and EPG with a dedicated scanner, with the null hypothesis that no significant differences in trueness would be observed among the techniques.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Materials and Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      This in vitro study used a mandibular edentulous stone cast with four straight multiunit abutment analogs positioned at sites #19, #22, #27, and #30. Four experimental groups were evaluated: DynamicAbut, using AGD\u2010aided IOIS; TruAbut, using horizontally extended NCSBs; PICApp, using smartphone\u2010based EPG; and MicronMapper, using dedicated EPG. Ten repeated acquisitions were performed per group (\n                      <jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>\n                      = 10;\n                      <jats:italic>N<\/jats:italic>\n                      = 40). A reference dataset was obtained with a calibrated laboratory scanner. All standard tessellation language (STL) files were imported into computer\u2010aided design software, converted to a uniform multiunit abutment library representation, and analyzed in 3D inspection software after best\u2010fit superimposition to the reference file. Primary outcomes were mean per\u2010implant axis deviation, pooled interimplant distance deviation, and pooled interimplant angulation deviation. Secondary outcomes included pairwise interimplant deviations and short\u2010span versus long\u2010span comparisons. Kruskal\u2013Wallis tests with Dunn post hoc comparisons were used for between\u2010group analyses, and Wilcoxon signed\u2010rank tests were used for within\u2010group span comparisons (\u03b1 = 0.05).\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Significant differences were identified among groups for all primary outcomes. DynamicAbut showed the highest mean per\u2010implant axis deviation (0.418 \u00b10.073), whereas TruAbut showed the lowest deviation (0.122 \u00b10.018). PICApp (0.204 \u00b10.044) and MicronMapper (0.239 \u00b10.030) showed intermediate axis deviations. For pooled interimplant distance deviation, PICApp (22.8 \u00b17.5\u00a0\u00b5m) and MicronMapper (22.1 \u00b12.9\u00a0\u00b5m) demonstrated significantly lower deviations than DynamicAbut (46.3 \u00b122.4\u00a0\u00b5m) and TruAbut (35.3 \u00b15.9\u00a0\u00b5m). For pooled interimplant angulation deviation, DynamicAbut showed the greatest deviation (0.343 \u00b10.175), while TruAbut (0.118 \u00b10.033) and PICApp (0.133 \u00b10.012) showed the lowest and statistically comparable deviations; MicronMapper showed intermediate values (0.199 \u00b10.069). Pairwise analyses showed that no single system was uniformly superior across all implant pairs. Span analysis showed that DynamicAbut had significantly greater long\u2010span angulation deviation than short\u2010span angulation deviation (\n                      <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\n                      = 0.027), whereas PICApp and MicronMapper showed favorable long\u2010span distance deviations.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The photogrammetric workflows, including both smartphone\u2010based and dedicated systems, provided the most favorable interimplant distance trueness, particularly across long edentulous spans. The horizontally extended NCSB technique provided the lowest per\u2010implant axis deviation, suggesting a potential advantage when precise axis reproduction is critical. The AGD\u2010aided IOIS workflow did not demonstrate a measurable trueness advantage and showed increased long\u2010span angulation deviation. Technique selection should be guided by the geometric demands of the clinical situation, particularly span length and angular tolerance, rather than by assuming universal superiority of a single acquisition method.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1111\/jopr.70244","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T07:13:58Z","timestamp":1790234038000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Comparative trueness of complete\u2010arch implant position acquisition using auxiliary geometric device\u2013aided and noncalibrated scanbody\u2013based intraoral scanning versus smartphone\u2010based and dedicated extraoral photogrammetry"],"prefix":"10.1111","author":[{"given":"Mohamed Sherif","family":"Omar","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Prosthodontics Indiana University School of Dentistry  Indianapolis Indiana USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yi\u2010Hao","family":"Lan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Prosthodontics Indiana University School of Dentistry  Indianapolis Indiana USA"},{"name":"Graduate Institute of Clinical Dentistry School of Dentistry National Taiwan University  Taipei Taiwan"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Toshiki","family":"Nagai","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Prosthodontics Indiana University School of Dentistry  Indianapolis Indiana USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Chao\u2010Chieh","family":"Yang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Prosthodontics Indiana University School of Dentistry  Indianapolis Indiana USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Wei\u2010Shao","family":"Lin","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Prosthodontics Indiana University School of Dentistry  Indianapolis Indiana USA"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]]},"reference":[{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_2_1","first-page":"38","article-title":"Changes in prosthetic screw stability because of misfit of implant\u2010supported prostheses","volume":"15","author":"Al\u2010Turki LE","year":"2002","journal-title":"Int J Prosthodont."},{"issue":"2","key":"e_1_2_6_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"244","DOI":"10.1111\/cid.12968","article-title":"Implant framework misfit: a systematic review on assessment methods and clinical complications","volume":"23","author":"Pan Y","year":"2021","journal-title":"Clin Implant Dent Relat Res."},{"issue":"4","key":"e_1_2_6_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1839","DOI":"10.1007\/s00784-020-03486-z","article-title":"Accuracy of intraoral scanning in completely and partially edentulous maxillary and mandibular jaws: an in vitro analysis","volume":"25","author":"Schimmel M","year":"2021","journal-title":"Clin Oral Investig."},{"issue":"12","key":"e_1_2_6_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1444","DOI":"10.1111\/clr.13844","article-title":"In vitro and in vivo accuracy of full\u2010arch digital implant impressions","volume":"32","author":"Rutkunas V","year":"2021","journal-title":"Clin Oral Implants Res."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jdent.2023.104636","article-title":"Evaluation of the accuracy of intraoral scanners for complete\u2010arch scanning: a systematic review and network meta\u2010analysis","volume":"137","author":"Vitai V","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Dent."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"236","DOI":"10.1111\/jerd.13322","article-title":"Classification of complete\u2010arch implant scanning techniques recorded by using intraoral scanners","volume":"37","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Esthet Restor Dent."},{"issue":"6","key":"e_1_2_6_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"844","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2021.08.018","article-title":"Techniques to improve the accuracy of complete arch implant intraoral digital scans: a systematic review","volume":"129","author":"Paratelli A","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"109","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.02.020","article-title":"G\u00f3mez\u2010Polo M. Accuracy of a complete arch noncalibrated splinting implant scanning technique with a palatal orientation recorded by using different intraoral scanners","volume":"135","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2026","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.3389\/froh.2025.1574149","article-title":"Conventional scan body vs. scan bodies with auxiliary geometric devices: an in vitro study for edentulous full\u2010arch implant impressions","volume":"6","author":"Gianfreda F","year":"2025","journal-title":"Front Oral Health."},{"issue":"4","key":"e_1_2_6_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"664","DOI":"10.3390\/ma19040664","article-title":"Materials and techniques for splinting scan bodies: a scoping review","volume":"19","author":"Pachiou A","year":"2026","journal-title":"Materials."},{"issue":"6","key":"e_1_2_6_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1058","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.11.018","article-title":"A systematic review of the accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using noncalibrated splinting or implant scan body techniques. Report of the Committee on Research in Fixed Prosthodontics of the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics","volume":"135","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"636","DOI":"10.1186\/s12903-021-02005-0","article-title":"Accuracy of photogrammetry, intraoral scanning, and conventional impression techniques for complete\u2010arch implant rehabilitation: an in vitro comparative study","volume":"21","author":"Ma B","year":"2021","journal-title":"BMC Oral Health."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jdent.2025.105969","article-title":"Complete arch implant capture using a photogrammetry algorithm and smartphone app: an in vitro study","volume":"161","author":"Santamar\u00eda\u2010Laorden A","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.11607\/ijp.9358"},{"issue":"5","key":"e_1_2_6_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"560","DOI":"10.1111\/clr.14252","article-title":"Accuracy of edentulous full\u2010arch implant impression: an in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry","volume":"35","author":"Cheng J","year":"2024","journal-title":"Clin Oral Implants Res."},{"issue":"3","key":"e_1_2_6_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"470","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2020.03.005","article-title":"Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete\u2010arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine","volume":"125","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"issue":"4","key":"e_1_2_6_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"777.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.11.020","article-title":"Accuracy of a smartphone app and photogrammetry algorithm in complete arch digital implant capture: an in vivo comparative study","volume":"135","author":"Santamar\u00eda\u2010Laorden A","year":"2026","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_19_1","volume-title":"ISO 5725\u20101:1994. Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results. Part 1: General principles and definitions","author":"International Organization for Standardization","year":"1994"},{"issue":"8","key":"e_1_2_6_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"991","DOI":"10.1111\/clr.14445","article-title":"Accuracy of a novel intraoral photogrammetry technique for complete\u2010arch implant impressions: an in vitro study","volume":"36","author":"Fu X\u2010J","year":"2025","journal-title":"Clin Oral Implants Res."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"230","DOI":"10.1111\/jerd.12985","article-title":"A guide for maximizing the accuracy of intraoral digital scans. Part 1: operator factors","volume":"35","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Esthet Restor Dent."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"241","DOI":"10.1111\/jerd.12993","article-title":"A guide for maximizing the accuracy of intraoral digital scans: part 2\u2010patient factors","volume":"35","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Esthet Restor Dent."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"108.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.09.012","article-title":"Clinical accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using a noncalibrated splinting technique, intraoral photogrammetry, and extraoral photogrammetry with snap\u2010on markers","volume":"135","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2026","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_24_1","volume-title":"ProMetrix Analytics: Statistical Analysis & Visualization. Version 2.2.0 [software]","author":"Omar MS","year":"2026"},{"issue":"5","key":"e_1_2_6_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e60","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.10.059","article-title":"Comparative accuracy of photogrammetry and intraoral scanners in recordings for complete arch implant\u2010supported prostheses: a systematic review and meta\u2010analysis","volume":"135","author":"Altalla H","year":"2025","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"issue":"2","key":"e_1_2_6_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"150","DOI":"10.1111\/jopr.13749","article-title":"Intraoral digital implant scans: parameters to improve accuracy","volume":"32","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2023","journal-title":"J Prosthodont."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jdent.2022.104220","article-title":"Understanding the effect of scan spans on the accuracy of intraoral and desktop scanners","volume":"124","author":"Chen Y","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3290\/j.qi.b6394659"},{"issue":"3","key":"e_1_2_6_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"605","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2025.07.002","article-title":"Does the interimplant scan body distance impact the scanning accuracy of an intraoral photogrammetry system?","volume":"135","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2026","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_30_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/jopr.14074"},{"issue":"3","key":"e_1_2_6_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1111\/cid.70059","article-title":"Photogrammetry versus intraoral scanning in complete\u2010arch digital implant impression: a systematic review and meta\u2010analysis","volume":"27","author":"Pozzi A","year":"2025","journal-title":"Clin Implant Dent Relat Res."},{"issue":"12","key":"e_1_2_6_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0295790","article-title":"Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: an in vitro study","volume":"18","author":"Meneghetti PC","year":"2023","journal-title":"PLoS One."},{"issue":"12","key":"e_1_2_6_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0332174","article-title":"Accuracy of intraoral scanners for full\u2010arch implant scanning in the Maxilla using horizontal scanbody","volume":"20","author":"Guimar\u00e3es AS","year":"2025","journal-title":"PLoS One."},{"issue":"1","key":"e_1_2_6_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"267","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2026.01.010","article-title":"Comparative accuracy study of three extraoral photogrammetry methods, one intraoral photogrammetry system, and a noncalibrated implant scan body technique","volume":"136","author":"Revilla\u2010Le\u00f3n M","year":"2026","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"key":"e_1_2_6_35_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"294","DOI":"10.1016\/j.prosdent.2019.12.011","article-title":"Influence of operator experience, scanner type, and scan size on 3D scans","volume":"125","author":"Resende CCD","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Prosthet Dent."},{"issue":"10","key":"e_1_2_6_36_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1106","DOI":"10.1111\/clr.14141","article-title":"Accuracy of complete\u2010arch digital implant impression with intraoral optical scanning and stereophotogrammetry: an in vivo prospective comparative study","volume":"34","author":"Pozzi A","year":"2023","journal-title":"Clin Oral Implants Res."}],"container-title":["Journal of Prosthodontics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/jopr.70244","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1111\/jopr.70244","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/jopr.70244","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]],"date-time":"2026-09-24T07:14:02Z","timestamp":1790234042000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/jopr.70244"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]]},"references-count":35,"alternative-id":["10.1111\/jopr.70244"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jopr.70244","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1059-941X","1532-849X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1059-941X","type":"print"},{"value":"1532-849X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,24]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2026-05-12","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-09-08","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-09-24","order":3,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}],"article-number":"jopr.70244"}}