<% item.title %>
Full arch scan within a minute, higher degree of accuracy, simpler handling: Primescan opens up a new chapter in digital dentistry.
Dentsply Sirona introduced digital impressions with CEREC to dentistry 30 years ago. Now, with Primescan, the company is introducing an intraoral scanner with new technology, which enables high-precision scans. This has been substantiated by a new study at the University of Zurich*.
You can find all information about Primescan (incl. images) and download the press kit in five languages here.
*Ender et al, Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in-vitro, Int J Comput Dent 2019; 22(1); 11- 19; in the peer group of intraoral scanners, which did not cover several systems commercially available today, Primescan showed the best median and mean values across complete arch, anterior and posterior segments, few statistical limitations apply
-
<% item.sbu.title %> <% item.type %>
<% item.assets.images %> <% item.assets.videos %> <% item.assets.documents %>
Primescan – a technological milestone
With Primescan, Dentsply Sirona introduces an intraoral scanner to the market, and, with its significant product features, achieves outstanding results and takes digital impressioning to a higher level of quality.
Speed
With Primescan, you can produce scans amazingly fast. You can capture an entire upper jaw in well under 30 seconds, and a full jaw scan in less than a minute. During the scanning process, the dynamic lens completes more than 10 movements per second, thereby enabling the "Dynamic Depth Scan." The result is more than 1 million 3-D points per second. This is thanks to Intelligent Processing, which filters, processes and compresses the high volume of data so that models can be calculated faster.
Accuracy
The high-precision Smart Pixel Sensor captures the data at an extremely high resolution and assesses the contrast in each pixel. For every 3-D image, Primescan consolidates more than 50,000 images per second, thereby offering a level of scanning precision that has never been achieved before. A new technology, for which a patent application has been submitted, in the form of optical high frequency analysis is used to calculate the 3-D points, resulting in an increased level of accuracy. This is further supported by an optical design that has been optimized for the measuring principle used and by the mechanical robustness of the optics.
Easy to use
Primescan enables a flexible, intuitive and very simple scan procedure, enabling faster access to tooth surfaces without the need for signifcant tilting. The captured images are calculated in a flash and put together without any visible scan interruptions.
A great feeling
Primescan is an intraoral scanner that can be subjected to all necessary hygienic reprocessing (wipe disinfection, autoclaving, hot air sterilization, high-level disinfection). This is made possible by three sleeve concepts (stainless steel sleeve, stainless steel sleeve with disposable window, disposable sleeves).
Facts & Figures
| Size | 50.9 x 58.8 x 253 mm Weight of approx. 525 g (stainless steel sleeve) |
| Field of View: | 16 x 16 mm |
| Technology | Realistic representation of the 3D model (color, surface) Perfect focus up to a depth of 20 mm One million 3D points captured per second New surface acquisition technology for which a patent application has been submitted (high-frequency contrast analysis) Primescan supports relative movements between the tip of the camera and the surface of the tooth, from 0 mm/s to 25 mm/s Consolidation of over 50,000 images per second Continuous fog-free working due to the heated exit window Motion detector: The camera switches on as soon as you remove the device from its holder |
| Operation | Touchscreen operation with a hygienic, optimally designed touchpad (with the option of trackball) The screen can be turned and tilted to achieve the best position for viewing the scanning process Balance: The pivotal point of the scanner is positioned so that it can be held like an instrument Scanning is possible at an angle to the tooth of between 5° and 85° Various materials can be scanned: Amalgam, gold and other metals; translucent materials |
| Hygiene | Perfectly hygienic due to the smooth surfaces Removable and interchangeable sleeves of various materials, with optimal hygienic properties (wipe disinfection, autoclaving, hot air sterilization, high-level disinfection) Fan-free design, for the prevention of inaccessible areas |
Downloads
Factsheet Primescan February 4, 2019 , 183 kB
Please find all facts and figures about Primescan in the factsheet.
Primescan Images February 4, 2019 , 29 MB
Please find picture material about Primescan here.
Conventional versus digital impressioning: An overview of the studies
For over 30 years, dentists have been able to create digital impressions at their practices. Today, thanks to continuous and further development, intraoral scanners deliver results that are at least as good as those obtained from conventional impressions. This has been verified by studies carried out over the past four years.
The comparison of digital and conventional impressions has often been the subject of scientific studies. The goal was to assess the quality of the restorations and the impressions themselves.
In a systematic assessment of studies, it was found that the accuracy of digital impressions is on the same level as those obtained by conventional impressioning methods for the manufacture of crowns and other permanent restorations [10]. Only in 2018 was it determined, in an in-vivo study, that digital intraoral impressioning for the manufacture of ceramic crowns leads to results identical to those obtained from conventional impressioning [1]. Furthermore, it was also determined that this statement applies, regardless of what type of intraoral scanner is used to create the digital impressions [8].
The fact that digital impressions are an adequate alternative to conventional impressioning becomes clear in the accuracy studies. Scans either indicated that permanent restorations had a better fit when using digital impressions compared to the usual techniques [4], or comparable results [2] [6].
Furthermore, the digital technique proves to be more efficient and more convenient than conventional impressioning techniques [5]. Regardless of the type of scanner used, the efficiency is similar to that obtained from conventional impressioning techniques [3].
Patient comfort is of particular significance. This important aspect has been addressed in several studies. Patients reported that digital impressioning was more comfortable than conventional techniques [9]. Above all, it has been accepted particularly well in orthodontistry [3]. Based on patient-centric results, the digital technique proves to be the most efficient, preferred method, compared to conventional impressioning [7].
An overview of the studies
- [1] Berrendero S et. al. Comparative study of all-ceramic crowns obtained from conventional and digital impressions: clinical findings. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Aug 30. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2606-8. [Epub ahead of print] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30167795
- [2] Ribeiro P et. al. Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions-An In Vitro Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 27;15(8). pii: E1599. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15081599. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30060540
- [3] Burzynski JA et. al. Comparison of digital intraoral scanners and alginate impressions: Time and patient satisfaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Apr;153(4):534-541. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.08.017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29602345
- [4] Chochlidakis KM et. al. Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Aug;116(2):184-190.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.017. Epub 2016 Mar 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26946916
- [5] Gjelvold B et. al. Intraoral Digital Impression Technique Compared to Conventional Impression Technique. A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Prosthodont. 2016 Jun;25(4):282-7. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12410. Epub 2015 Nov 30. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26618259
- [6] Abdel-Azim T et. al. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Oct;114(4):554-9. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.04.001. Epub 2015 Jun 20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26100929
- [7] Joda T et. al. Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Dec;27(12):e185-e189. doi: 10.1111/clr.12600. Epub 2015 Apr 12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25864771
- [8] Woestmann B et. al. Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Nov;19(8):2027-34. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1430-7. Epub 2015 Feb 20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25693497
- [9] Yuzbasioglu E et. al. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health. 2014 Jan 30;14:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-14-10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24479892
- [10] Ahlholm P et. al. Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review. J Prosthodont. 2018 Jan;27(1):35-41. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12527. Epub 2016 Aug 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27483210
