The "intraoral vs. lab scanner" debate is misguided — most efficient labs run both. The question is which capture each device owns.
Intraoral scanner (IOS)
Wins on patient experience and skips the physical impression. Accuracy is now sub-20 µm, enough for crown and bridge. Use it for single units, short spans, and ortho scans where speed matters.
Lab scanner
Excels at articulating models, full-arch dies, and re-scanning poured models with <10 µm detail. Use it for complex full-arch, implant workflows, and when you already have a physical impression.
Hybrid rule
- IOS for the mouth, lab scanner for the model.
- Send open STL/PLY so either feeds any mill.
- Keep one calibration artefact to cross-check both.
Compare the Scanning Series IOS and the bench lab scanners before committing.
Where each wins
| Task | Best tool |
|---|---|
| Single crown prep | Intraoral |
| Full-arch edentulous | Lab (model) scan |
| Prep plus antagonist | Intraoral |
Modern intraoral scanners reach 10–20 µm on a single prep but drift on large spans; a lab scanner on a printed model stays consistent across the arch. A hybrid works well: scan the prep intraorally, scan antagonists on the model.