Purpose. To evaluate the effect of cheek retractors on the accuracy of capturing peripheral

borders in totally edentulous digital scans by comparing the conventional impression technique

to digital scans made using two different cheek retractors. Material and Methods. Sixteen

edentulous maxillary impressions were made using three techniques: the conventional

impression technique, using modeling thermoplastic compound and zinc oxide eugenol paste; the

digital intraoral scanning technique using the DIO scan retractor (DIO); and using the Br.nemark

lip retractor (BRAN). The control impressions of each patient were poured, scanned using a

desktop scanner, then transferred into a three-dimensional analysis software. DIO and BRAN

groups were scanned using an intraoral scanner, imported, and superimposed using best fit

algorithm on the corresponding control. The root mean square for the whole surface and for

particular interest regions were calculated to assess the degree of trueness. The patients'

perceptions of the impression techniques were the secondary outcomes. Statistical analyses were

performed using the one sample T-test and Wilcoxon test (α=.05). Results. Significant

discrepancies were found for BRAN and DIO compared to the control. No significant

discrepancies were found when comparing RMS of BRAN and DIO at different regions. Scan

retractors had a significant impact on patient satisfaction, with patients preferring DIO.

Conclusions. Edentulous intraoral scans made using cheek retractors had similar deviations when

compared to each other but diverged from the conventional impression in edentulous maxilla.

Patient preferences for intraoral scans over conventional impressions were confirmed.

Clinical Implications. The use of different retracting methods during intraoral scanning of totally

edentulous maxillary arches does not affect the peripheral border registration.