title: Smart fusion vs. double scan: a comparison between two data-matching protocols for a computer guided implant planning.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To make a comparison between two different approaches of data matching during the preparation of a computer guided implant planning.
  
  
  METHODS
  Electronic and manual literature searches were performed to collect information about the double-scan protocol and the smart fusion protocol. The two systems were then tested to identify or confirm their advantages and disadvantages.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The double scan protocol is a reliable and well-known process to obtain a fusion between the anatomical data (CBCT) and the prosthetic data (radiographic template). It is possible to use this protocol both in dentate and edentulous patients. The newly developed smart fusion technique offers the possibility to superimpose the anatomical data (CBCT) onto the prosthetic data (cast + wax-up scan) without the production of a radiographic template. This system is still being tested by the clinicians even though dental manufacturers already consider it as the best solution for the dentate patients selected for a static computer guided implant surgery.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Smart fusion protocol offers a reasonable time and cost reduction even though its application is limited to dentate patients. A noticeable drawback of the workflow is the matching step: often a manual intervention is necessary to obtain a correct alignment of the CBCT data with the lab scan of the cast. This issue is partially due to the use of non-volume stable materials during the preparation of the cast. Future improvements could be made by combining CBCT data with direct optical scans of patient dental arches in order to create the so-called 'virtual patient'.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Arcuri
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: De Vico
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Ottria
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Condò
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Cerroni
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Mancini
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, University of Roma «Tor Vergata», School of Dentistry.
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Barlattani
mesh_terms: D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D025321:Surgery, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*
keywords: Cast scan; Computer; Double scan; Guided surgery; Implant planningobtain; Matching