Comparative study evaluates accuracy of different photogrammetry systems for complete-arch digital impressions, suggesting need for further validation in clinical settings.
Intraoral, extraoral, and navigation photogrammetry demonstrated high accuracy suitable for complete-arch digital impressions. Differences among systems were small, and their clinical implications require further validation under clinical conditions. The IPG system showed slightly lower global linear deviations, whereas EPG and NPG provided significantly shorter implant-registration times. Both photogrammetry system and implant position significantly influenced linear deviation patterns, particularly along the horizontal axes, demonstrating system-dependent behavior between anterior and posterior sites.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pozzi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: