Digital versus conventional workflow for the fabrication of physical casts for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review of accuracy

Abstract

Statement of problem A consensus on the accuracy of additively manufactured casts in comparison with those fabricated by using conventional techniques for fixed dental prostheses is lacking. Purpose The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the accuracy of additively manufactured casts for tooth- or implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in comparison with that of gypsum casts. Material and methods This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CDR42020161006). Eight databases were searched in December 2019 and updated in September 2020. Studies evaluating the dimensional accuracy of additively manufactured casts for fixed dental prostheses in comparison with that of gypsum casts were included. An adapted checklist for reporting in vitro studies (Checklist for Reporting In vitro Studies guidelines) was used to assess the risk of bias. Results Eight studies evaluating tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis casts and 7 studies evaluating implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis casts were eligible for this review. Gypsum casts showed greater accuracy (trueness and precision) in most studies, although additively manufactured casts also yielded highly precise data. One study was associated with a low risk of bias, 9 with a moderate risk of bias, and 5 with a high risk of bias. Conclusions In v…