The Accuracy of Digital vs Conventional Impression among Patients Receiving Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Clinical Studies
Keywords:
Digital Impression; Conventional Impression; Intraoral Scanner; Dental Implants; Distance Deviation; Angular DeviationAbstract
Background: The accuracy of implant impressions is critical for achieving passive fitness and preventing biological and mechanical complications. Digital intraoral scanners have emerged as an alternative to conventional elastomeric impressions, but their comparative three-dimensional accuracy in partially and completely edentulous patients remains unclear. Materials and Methods: An electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed. Clinical human studies directly comparing digital and conventional implant impressions in partially or completely edentulous patients were included. Distance- and angular-deviation were pooled. Results: Eight clinical studies were included. In the prespecified random-effects analysis, no significant difference was found between digital and conventional impressions for distance deviation (MD = 1.14 mm; 95% CI, -1.88 to 4.16; I2 = 98.7%) or angular deviation (MD = 0.12 degrees; 95% CI, -3.43 to 3.67; I2 = 97.5%). Fixed-effect estimates were calculated only as exploratory sensitivity analyses because heterogeneity was extreme. Subgroup findings, including lower distance and angular deviation with digital impressions in single-implant cases, should be interpreted cautiously because they were based on few studies and, for angular deviation, a single study. Conclusions: Digital and conventional impressions showed comparable overall three-dimensional accuracy under random-effects models; however, the certainty and generalizability of the pooled estimates are limited by extreme heterogeneity, sparse clinical evidence, and subgroup analyses with limited data. Digital workflows may be clinically useful for single-implant and short-span cases, whereas multi-implant and full-arch cases require individualized technique selection according to arch length, implant distribution, operator experience, and available verification methods.
References
Van de Winkel T, Delfos F, van der Heijden O, Bronkhorst E, Verhamme L, Meijer G. Fully digital versus conventional workflow: Are removable complete overdentures equally good? A randomized crossover trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(1):e13398.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13398
PMid:39350584 PMCid:PMC11739062
Yoon MA, Sun M, Jeon J, Kang YJ, Kim JH. Comparison of the accuracy of removable partial denture frameworks fabricated using conventional and digital impressions: a clinical study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2025;17(5):269-78.
https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2025.17.5.269
PMid:41180327 PMCid:PMC12575064
Kernen-Gintaute A, Akulauskas M, Kernen F, Zitzmann NU, Spies BC, Burkhardt F. Accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions in edentulous jaws: A clinical comparative study. J Dent. 2025;153:105559.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105559
PMid:39761905
Keskin DE, Sağlam G, Geduk Ş E. Effect of conventional and digital fabrication techniques on marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate endocrowns. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):416.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05775-z
PMid:40119390 PMCid:PMC11927280
Sarkaria AS, Duke A. Digitally manufactured partial coverage restorations: is it time to down the impression trays or still a work in progress? Evid Based Dent. 2024;25(1):35-6.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-024-00971-2
PMid:38243025
Yilbas S, Ongul D, Karatasli B, Sermet B. The effect of cement and impression methods on the marginal and internal adaptation of the current monolithic blocks - 3D scanning evaluation. J Clin Exp Dent. 2024;16(7):e808-e14.
https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61606
PMid:39219836 PMCid:PMC11360463
Güntekin N, Çiftçi A, Gözen M, İleri SA. The Effect of Image Count on Accuracy in Digital Measurements in Dentistry. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024;14(19).
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14192122
PMid:39410526 PMCid:PMC11475685
Haghi HR, Ghanbarzadeh J, Kiamanesh E. A randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical fit and chairside adjustment time for implant-supported crowns fabricated by fully digital and partially digital techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;131(5):865-70.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.02.024
PMid:35525625
Jasim AG, Abo Elezz MG, Altonbary GY, Elsyad MA. Accuracy of digital and conventional implant-level impression techniques for maxillary full-arch screw-retained prosthesis: A crossover randomized trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024;26(4):714-23.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13336
PMid:38727015
Alsharbaty MHM, Alikhasi M, Zarrati S, Shamshiri AR. A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(4):e902-e8.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12764
PMid:29423969 PMCid:PMC11458096
Andriessen FS, Rijkens DR, van der Meer WJ, Wismeijer DW. Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111(3):186-94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.07.010
PMid:24210732 PMCid:PMC11402722
Dohiem MM, Abdelaziz MS, Abdalla MF, Fawzy AM. Digital assessment of the accuracy of implant impression techniques in free end saddle partially edentulous patients. A controlled clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):486.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-022-02505-7
PMid:36371189 PMCid:PMC9655800
Elashry WY, Elsheikh MM, Elsheikh AM. Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques in bilateral distal extension cases: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):764.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04495-0
PMid:38970004 PMCid:PMC11227137
Hanozin B, Li Manni L, Lecloux G, Bacevic M, Lambert F. Digital vs. conventional workflow for one-abutment one-time immediate restoration in the esthetic zone: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Implant Dent. 2022;8(1):7.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00406-6
PMid:35129763 PMCid:PMC8821739
Jiang X, Lin Y, Cui HY, Di P. Immediate loading of multiple splinted implants via complete digital workflow: A pilot clinical study with 1-year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21(3):446-53.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12781
PMid:31025525
Nagata K, Fuchigami K, Okuhama Y, Wakamori K, Tsuruoka H, Nakashizu T, et al. Comparison of digital and silicone impressions for single-tooth implants and two- and three-unit implants for a free-end edentulous saddle. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):464.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01836-1
PMid:34556111 PMCid:PMC8458793
Tallarico M, Xhanari E, Kim YJ, Cocchi F, Martinolli M, Alushi A, et al. Accuracy of computer-assisted template-based implant placement using conventional impression and scan model or intraoral digital impression: A randomised controlled trial with 1 year of follow-up. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2019;12(2):197-206.
D'Ambrosio F, Giordano F, Sangiovanni G, Di Palo MP, Amato M. Conventional versus Digital Dental Impression Techniques: What Is the Future? An Umbrella Review. Prosthesis. 2023;5(3):851-75.
https://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis5030060
Albanchez-González MI, Brinkmann JC, Peláez-Rico J, López-Suárez C, Rodríguez-Alonso V, Suárez-García MJ. Accuracy of Digital Dental Implants Impression Taking with Intraoral Scanners Compared with Conventional Impression Techniques: A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(4).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042026
PMid:35206217 PMCid:PMC8872312
Joensahakij N, Serichetaphongse P, Chengprapakorn W. The accuracy of conventional versus digital (intraoral scanner or photogrammetry) impression techniques in full-arch implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review. Evid Based Dent. 2024;25(4):216-7.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-024-01045-z
PMid:39134687
Park JS, Alshehri YFA, Kruger E, Villata L. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions in partially dentate patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2025;160:105918.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105918
PMid:40553823
Grande F, Nuytens P, Zahabiyoun S, Iocca O, Catapano S, Mijiritsky E. Factors influencing the intraoral implant scan accuracy: a review of the literature. Journal of Dentistry. 2025;161:105973.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105973
PMid:40675250
Abduo J, Palamara JEA. Accuracy of digital impressions versus conventional impressions for 2 implants: an in vitro study evaluating the effect of implant angulation. Int J Implant Dent. 2021;7(1):75.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-021-00355-6
PMid:34327601 PMCid:PMC8322372
Pesce P, Nicolini P, Caponio VCA, Zecca PA, Canullo L, Isola G, et al. Accuracy of Full-Arch Intraoral Scans Versus Conventional Impression: A Systematic Review with a Meta-Analysis and a Proposal to Standardise the Analysis of the Accuracy. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025;14(1):71.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14010071
PMid:39797155 PMCid:PMC11721843
Rutkūnas V, Auškalnis L, Pletkus J. Intraoral scanners in implant prosthodontics. A narrative review. Journal of Dentistry. 2024;148:105152.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105152
PMid:38909643
Arcuri L, Lorenzi C, Vanni A, Bianchi N, Dolci A, Arcuri C. Comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques on implants: a review. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020;34(1 Suppl. 1):89-97. Dental supplement.
Ayres G, Parize H, Mendonça LM, Kubata BR, Tirapelli C. Is the digital workflow more efficient for manufacturing partial-coverage restorations? A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;133(6):1438-47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.08.005
PMid:37716898
García-Gil I, Cortés-Bretón-Brinkmann J, Jiménez-García J, Peláez-Rico J, Suárez-García MJ. Precision and practical usefulness of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry: A systematic literature review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020;12(8):e784-e93.
https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.57025
PMid:32913577 PMCid:PMC7474947
García-Gil I, Perez de la Calle C, Lopez-Suarez C, Pontevedra P, Suarez MJ. Comparative analysis of trueness between conventional and digital impression in dental-supported fixed dental prosthesis with vertical preparation. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020;12(9):e896-e901.
https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.56967
PMid:32994882 PMCid:PMC7511056
Pesce P, Nicolini P, Caponio VCA, Zecca PA, Canullo L, Isola G, et al. Accuracy of Full-Arch Intraoral Scans Versus Conventional Impression: A Systematic Review with a Meta-Analysis and a Proposal to Standardise the Analysis of the Accuracy. J Clin Med. 2024;14(1).
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14010071
PMid:39797155 PMCid:PMC11721843
Saeed EAM, Alaghbari SS, Lin N. The impact of digitization and conventional techniques on the fit of fixed partial dentures FPDs: systematic review and Meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2023;23(1):965.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03628-1
PMid:38049754 PMCid:PMC10696807
Alfaraj A, Alqudaihi F, Khurshid Z, Qadiri O, Lin WS. Comparative analyses of accuracy between digital and conventional impressions for complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses-A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthodont. 2025.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.14094
PMid:40660725
Alqahtani SM, Almalki MS, Almarzouki M, AlResayes SS, Hassan NN, Mohana AJI, et al. Dimensional Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners in Recording Digital Impressions of Post and Core Preparations: A Systematic Review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024;14(24).
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics14242890
PMid:39767251 PMCid:PMC11675224
Sivaramakrishnan G, Alsobaiei M, Sridharan K. Patient preference and operating time for digital versus conventional impressions: a network meta-analysis. Aust Dent J. 2020;65(1):58-69.
https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12737
PMid:31749234
Hasanzade M, Aminikhah M, Afrashtehfar KI, Alikhasi M. Marginal and internal adaptation of single crowns and fixed dental prostheses by using digital and conventional workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(3):360-8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.007
PMid:32928518
Joda T, Zarone F, Ferrari M. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):124.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0415-0
PMid:28927393 PMCid:PMC5606018
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Galen Medical Journal

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.





