Intraoral Scanning Superior to Conventional Impressions for Implant Prostheses: Study

A new study published in The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry showed that intraoral scanning provides better patient comfort, faster impression times, and shorter correction periods when compared to traditional impression methods for implant prostheses.

A negative imprint of an oral structure used to create a prosthesis or dental repair is called a dental impression. Making an accurate imprint is essential to creating dental restorations that fit properly. Inaccurate impressions that result in implant prosthesis misfits can cause both biological and mechanical issues. Many imprinting techniques have been attempted to produce a passive fit between implant frames and implant bodies. For precision, a variety of imprint techniques have been devised, including coping modification, impression materials, and transfer or pick-up techniques.

Conventional imprint techniques have historically been used for this, but more recent developments have made intraoral scanning (IOS) a digital option. The mistake of expansion, shrinkage, and distortion of the impression or gypsum material cannot be eliminated by traditional imprint processes that use a tray and impression material. An intraoral scanner may offer a way to get around these mistakes.

Dental CAD/CAM (computer aided design/computer aided manufacture) offers a quick, precise, and simple production process in comparison to traditional prosthetic fabrication methods. Thus, this study by Ribeiro CSC and team evaluated the contrast digital and traditional impressions, as well as the accuracy, time, and patient choice of implant-supported fixed prosthesis instances.

This review was recorded in PROSPERO and adhered to PRISMA criteria. For articles published up until September 2023, two independent reviewers examined PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and gray literature (ProQuest). The ROB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias. Rev-Man 5.4 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. A total of 737 patients from 27 trials were chosen.

Qualitative investigation revealed that both techniques' accuracy and prosthesis outcomes were comparable. Digital impressions have reduced adjustment and impression times.

The patients' preference for digital impressions was consistently reported in twelve investigations that assessed their perceptions. A substantial variation in scanning duration for single crowns was found by the meta-analysis.

Significant variations were also noted in the assessments of patient choice for the digital imprint and correction length. Overall, in terms of patient perception, impression time, and adjustment length, intraoral scanning yields superior outcomes.

Source:

Ribeiro, C. S. C., Brandão, M. T. O., Moreira, G. C., Bitencourt, S. B., de Carvalho, R. F., & Lemos, C. A. A. (2025). Intraoral scanning versus conventional impression for implant prostheses: A systematic review. The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry. https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2811Ribeiro13