Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital vs. Conventional Impressions for Complete Arch Implant Rehabilitation: A Comparative Study

Abstract

The evolution of digital dentistry has revolutionized implant rehabilitation protocols, with intraoral scanners increasingly replacing conventional impression techniques. This comparative study examines the three-dimensional accuracy of digital impressions versus conventional impressions in complete arch implant rehabilitation through systematic analysis of trueness and precision metrics. A comprehensive evaluation of contemporary literature reveals that digital impression systems demonstrate comparable or superior accuracy to conventional polyvinyl siloxane impressions, particularly in inter-implant distance measurements and angular deviations. The mean trueness values for digital impressions range from 45.2 to 127.8 micrometers, while conventional impressions exhibit values between 52.3 and 148.6 micrometers across multiple studies. Digital workflows present significant advantages in clinical efficiency, patient comfort, and chairside time reduction, though conventional techniques maintain relevance in specific clinical scenarios involving extensive edentulous spans exceeding six implants. This investigation synthesizes current evidence regarding accuracy parameters, clinical implications, and workflow considerations to guide practitioners in selecting optimal impression modalities for complete arch implant rehabilitation. The findings suggest that digital impression technology has matured to a level where it can reliably serve as the primary impression method for most implant-supported full-arch restorations, while acknowledging that material selection, operator experience, and specific clinical conditions remain critical determinants of ultimate restoration success.