Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
July 15, 2025Journal of Prosthodontics

Comparative analyses of accuracy between digital and conventional impressions for complete‐arch implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

AAAmal AlfarajFAFatema AlqudaihiZKZohaib Khurshid

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Systematic review reveals no major accuracy difference between digital impressions and conventional methods in complete-arch implants, suggesting both have clinical validity.

Key Points

  • Core finding indicates digital impressions show comparable 3D accuracy to conventional impressions for fixed dental prostheses.
  • Meta-analysis of 25 studies found no significant difference in impression accuracy, with a p-value of 0.74 indicating similarity.
  • Subgroup analysis demonstrated conventional impressions slightly favored over digital when more than 4 implants were present.
  • Evidence suggests a need for better-designed studies to establish standards for using digital techniques in clinical practice.

Cite This Study

Alfaraj et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/689a02bce6551bb0af8cc5f1https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.14094
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Implant Impressions in Edentulous Jaws: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies2026 · 1 citations
  2. 2Evaluation of four digital methods in capturing complete‐arch implant positions: Direct scanning, splinted scan bodies, three‐dimensional‐printed scan aids, and intraoral photogrammetry2026
  3. 3Comparative Evaluation of Conventional and Digital Workflow Impressions for Implant-Supported Restorations2026 · 4 citations
  4. 4Evaluation and Comparison of the Precision of Dental Implant Impressions and the Marginal Fit of Crowns Using Conventional and Digital Methods: A Clinical Study2025
  5. 5Accuracy of edentulous full‐arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry2024 · 81 citations