Introduction: This systematic study compared the accuracy of digital and conventional impressions in completely and partially edentulous cases. Materials and methods: Exploration was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Google scholar databases. The focused subject of exploration in our systematic strategy was in a PICO set up. Results and discussion: Following screening of the explored studies, 11 were found eligible. Five in vitro studies were conducted on completely edentulous subjects, while 5 in vitro and 1 clinical article evaluated the partially edentulous ones. A quantitative analysis was conducted for five studies in partially edentulous subjects, with high rates of heterogeneity. We carried out a random-effects model to determine the effect size. According to the five reports on partially edentulous patients, the mean 3D difference among conventional and digital methods was 14.13 μm (95% CI: 9.83, 18.43), while the digital method gave a nominal difference (P=0.00). Six studies were not involved in meta-analysis because of the heterogeneity between plans. Angulation influenced accuracy in the partially edentulous impressions (P=0.47). Conclusions: Based on in vitro examinations, digital scans appear to be the same as conventional implant impressions in terms of 3D accuracy. However, clinical studies are suggested to examine the clinical accuracy of digital scans.
Keywords:- digital technique
- IMPLANT
- impression