We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website and to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage. You will find more information in our privacy policy. By continuing to use our website, you agree to this. Yes, I agree
International Poster Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine



Forgotten password?


Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 14 (2012), No. 2     15. June 2012

Int Poster J Dent Oral Med 2012, Vol 14 No 2, Poster 592

Accuracy of scannable bite registration materials by using the CEREC 3D system

Language: English

Dr. Konstantin Gubitz, Prof. Dr. Michael Gente,
Department of Prosthodontics, Research Unit Propaedeutik, Philipps-University Marburg, Germany

Deutscher Zahnärztetag 2010
Frankfurt am Main


The objective of the study was to determine how exactly the interocclusal record passes information to the Cerec 3D® system and the technique influence on accuracy. We examined the simulated clinical situation in mouth and the labor situation on plaster models.


Despite consideration of a interocclusal record the Cerec 3D®-system (Sirona Dental Systems, Bensheim Germany) often creates restorations that need to be correctly grinded in at the patients occlusion.

Material and Methods

We examined nine scannable materials¹ of different manufacturers and one conventional non-scannable material² whose surface was "powdered"³. The interocclusal records were taken in stylized antagonistic jaw models [Fig. 1] of known dimensions which were mounted in an articulator to simulate the oral situation.

Steps after curing the interocclusal record:
1. Removing - Trimming - Repositioning [Fig. 2 - Scanning]
2. Trimming in situ [Fig. 2 - Scanning]
3. Removing - Trimming - Transposing on plaster model [Fig. 3 - Scanning].

Finally, the interocclusal records placed on tooth were pictured in the Cerec® system [Fig. 4]. To assess the accuracy of bite registration the Cerec®-internal height datas on the virtual model were used. These datas were inserted in a specially developed algorithm. Thereby, the reproduction accuracy could be calculated in comparison to the known dimensions of the jaw model.

Fig. 1 Fig. 2
Fig. 3 Fig. 4
Fig. 5: Flow process chart


While the extraoral trimmed and repositioned records show deviations 17-29 microns on average, the in situ trimmed records show variations about only 1-14 microns. These differences were statistically significant (p < 0,05, tested with Wilcoxon-Test).
When transposing the records on a plaster model, deviations rise to 36-98 microns on average.

Diagram 1 Diagram 2


The most accurate proceeding using a bite registration on the Cerec 3D® system is characterized by very low manipulation on registrate. Trimming the record should be done in situ without its removal. Vertical discrepancies increased when using records on plaster models.

Supplementary Notes

¹) citoGum bite S-can® (mds Medical & Dental Service GmbH)
Flexitime Bite® (Heraeus Kulzer GmbH)
Futar Scan® (Kettenbach GmbH & Co. KG)
granit perfect 3D® (müller-omicron GmbH & Co. KG)
Kanibite Scan® (KaniedentaGmbH & Co. KG)
pixelbite® (Detax GmbH & Co. KG)
R-Si-Line Metal-Bite gold® (R-dental GmbH)
StoneBite scan® (Dreve Dentamid GmbH)
Virtual CADbiteRegistration® (Ivoclar Vivadent GmbH)

²) Futar D Fast® (Kettenbach GmbH & Co. KG)

³) scan'spray plus® (Dentaco GmbH)

This Poster was submitted by Dr. Konstantin Gubitz.

Correspondence address:
Dr. Konstantin Gubitz
Philipps-University Marburg
Department of Prosthodontics, Research Unit Propaedeutik
Georg-Voigt-Str. 3
35039 Marburg