Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • General
  • Published:

Soft tissue surgery and scanners: applications and perspectives into clinical research

British Dental Journal volume 229, pages 190–195 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

With the advent of digital dentistry, we have more accurate intraoral scanners (IOSs) than ever before. Overcoming various difficulties with conventional impression techniques, optical IOSs are now widely used within the restorative and orthodontic specialities. In recent years, IOSs have been steadily integrated into soft tissue surgery, and guided implant surgery.

The aim of this review article is to examine current applications and methodologies when using digital scanners to quantify outcomes in soft tissue surgery. In addition, advantages and disadvantages of current techniques are discussed, alongside an insight into the new perspectives generated by this technology. Areas for future research are highlighted.

This overview of contemporary literature leads to the conclusion that current IOSs are sufficiently accurate for assessing and monitoring soft tissue changes; however, further studies are needed to address the complexities of scanning mobile tissues.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patzelt S B M, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, Att W. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc 2014; 145: 542-555.

  2. Christensen G J. Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139: 761-763.

  3. Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L et al. Intraoral Scanner Technologies: A review to Make a Successful Impression. J Health Eng 2017; DOI: 10.1155/2017/8427595.

  4. Martin C B, Chalmers E V, McIntyre G T, Cochrane H, Mossey P A. Orthodontic scanners: what's available? J Orthod 2015; 42: 136-143.

  5. Ender A, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 115: 313-320.

  6. Vasudavan S, Sullivan S R, Sonis A L. Comparison of intraoral 3D scanning and conventional impressions for fabrication of orthodontic retainers. J Clin Orthod 2010; 44: 495-497.

  7. Lanis A, Álvarez Del Canto O. The combination of digital surface scanners and cone beam computed tomography technology for guided implant surgery using 3Shape implant studio software: a case history report. Int J Prosthodont 2015; 28: 169-178.

  8. Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G, Logozzo S. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 149.

  9. Zimmermann M, Mehl A, Mörmann W H, Reich S. Intraoral scanning systems - a current overview. Int J Comput Dent 2015; 18: 101-129.

  10. Kim J, Park J M, Kim M, Heo S J, Shin I H, Kim M. Comparison of experience curves between two 3dimensional intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent 2016; 116: 221-230.

  11. Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano F G. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17: 92.

  12. Jemt T. Regeneration of gingival papillae after single-implant treatment. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1997; 17: 326-333.

  13. Nordland W P, Tarnow DP. A classification system for loss of papillary height. J Periodontol 1998; 69: 1124-1126.

  14. Cardaropoli D, Re S, Corrente G. The Papilla Presence Index (PPI): a new system to assess interproximal papillary levels. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004; 24: 488-492.

  15. Miller Jr P D. A classification of marginal tissue recession. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1985; 5: 8-13.

  16. Rotundo R, Mori M, Bonaccini D, Baldi C. Intraand inter-rater agreement of a new classification system of gingival recession defects. Eur J Oral Implantol 2011; 4: 127-133.

  17. Lindström M J R, Ahmad M, Jimbo R, Ameri A, Von Steyern P V, Becktor J P. Volumetric measurement of dentoalveolar defects by means of intraoral 3D scanner and gravimetric model. Odontology 2019; 107: 353.

  18. Studer S P, Sourlier D, Wegmann U, Schärer P, Rees T D. Quantitative measurement of volume changes induced by oral plastic surgery: validation of an optical method using different geometrically-formed specimens. J Periodontol 1997; 68: 950-962.

  19. Windisch S I, Jung R E, Sailer I, Studer S P, Ender A, Hammerle C H. A new optical method to evaluate three-dimensional volume changes of alveolar contours: a methodological in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 545-551.

  20. Fickl S, Schneider D, Zuhr O et al. Dimensional changes of the ridge contour after socket preservation and buccal overbuilding: an animal study. J Clin Periodontol 2009; 36: 442-448.

  21. Thoma D S, Jung R E, Schneider D et al. Soft tissue volume augmentation by the use of collagenbased matrices: a volumetric analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2010; 37: 659-666.

  22. Strebel J, Ender A, Paqué F, Krähenmann M, Attin T, Schmidlin P R. In vivo validation of a three-dimensional optical method to document volumetric soft tissue changes of the interdental papilla. J Periodontol 2009; 80: 56-61.

  23. Schneider D, Grunder U, Ender A, Hammerle C H F, Jung R E. Volume gain and stability of peri-implant tissue following bone and soft tissue augmentation: 1year results from a prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011; 22: 28-37.

  24. Sanz Martin I, Benic G I, Hammerle C H, Thoma D S. Prospective randomized controlled clinical study comparing two dental implant types: volumetric soft tissue changes at 1 year of loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015; 27: 406-411.

  25. Bienz S P, Sailer I, Sanz-Martin I, Jung R E, Hammerle C H F, Thoma D S. Volumetric changes at pontic sites with or without soft tissue grafting: a controlled clinical study with a 10-year follow-up. J Clin Periodontol 2017; 44: 178-184.

  26. Lehmann K M, Kasaj A, Ross A, Kammerer P W, Wagner W, Scheller H. A new method of volumetric evaluation of gingival recession: A feasibility study. J Periodontol 2012; 83: 50-54.

  27. Mehl A, Gloger W, Kunzelmann K H, Hickel R. A new optical 3D device for the detection of wear. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 1799-1807.

  28. Schneider D, Ender A, Truninger T et al. Comparison between clinical and digital soft tissue measurements. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014; 26: 191-199.

  29. Rebele S F, Zuhr O, Schneider D, Jung R E, Hürzeler M B. Tunnel technique with connective tissue graft versus coronally advanced flap with enamel matrix derivative for root coverage: a RCT using 3D digital measuring methods. Part II. Volumetric studies on healing dynamics and gingival dimensions. J Clin Periodontol 2014; 41: 593-603.

  30. Bienz S P, Jung R E, Sapata V M, Hammerle C H F, Husler J, Thoma D S. Volumetric changes and peri-implant health at implant sites with or without soft tissue grafting in the esthetic zone, a retrospective case-control study with a 5year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017; 28: 1459-1465.

  31. Chen S Y, Liang W M, Chen F N. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric impression materials. J Dent 2004; 32: 603-609.

  32. Zadeh H H, Abdelhamid A, Omran M, Bakhshalian N, Tarnow D. An open randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate ridge preservation and repair using SocketKAP(™) and SocketKAGE(™): part 1threedimensional volumetric soft tissue analysis of study casts. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016; 27: 640-649.

  33. Belser U C, Grutter L, Vailati F, Bornstein M M, Weber HP, Buser D. Outcome evaluation of early placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implants using objective esthetic criteria: A cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 patients with a 2 to 4 year follow up using pink and white esthetic scores. J Periodontol 2009; 80: 140-151.

  34. Johnston W M, Kao E C. Assessment and Appearance Match by Visual Observation and Clinical Colorimetry. J Dent Res 1989; 68: 819-822.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School, 378 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, Galway, G2 3JZ, UK

    Danielle S. Dineen & Matthew J. Brennand Roper

Authors
  1. Danielle S. Dineen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew J. Brennand Roper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danielle S. Dineen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dineen, D., Brennand Roper, M. Soft tissue surgery and scanners: applications and perspectives into clinical research. Br Dent J 229, 190–195 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-020-1845-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-020-1845-7

Search

Advanced search

Quick links