COMPARISON OF THE DIGITAL TECHNIQUE USING THE CAD/CAM SYSTEM AND CONVENTIONAL IMPRESSIONS
COMPARISON BETWEEN CAD/CAM SYSTEM AND CONVENTIONAL IMPRESSIONS.
Keywords:
Restorative Dentistry, Dental Models, Digital Technology y CAD/CAM SystemsAbstract
This study aimed to compare the digital impression technique using the CAD/CAM system with conventional impression methods in dentistry through a bibliographic review of updated scientific literature. Introduction: Dental impressions are a fundamental procedure in restorative dentistry, where accuracy determines the quality and longevity of restorations. The introduction of digital systems has transformed traditional clinical workflows. Objective: To comparatively analyze the accuracy, efficiency, and clinical applicability of digital versus conventional impressions. Materials and Methods: A qualitative bibliographic review was conducted using specialized databases such as SciELO, Google Scholar, Hindawi, ResearchGate, and DSpace. Twenty-four publications from 2015 to 2025 in Spanish, English, and Portuguese were selected, focusing on dimensional accuracy, operative efficiency, and clinical performance of both methods. Results: Findings indicate that digital impressions optimize workflow, enhance patient comfort, and facilitate efficient data management. However, their accuracy depends on factors such as operator experience, scanner type, and scanning protocol. Conventional techniques, although more time-consuming and prone to error, remain reliable and widely used in clinical practice. Conclusions: Both methods demonstrate relevant clinical value. Digital impressions using CAD/CAM stand out for their precision, efficiency, and adaptability, while conventional impressions continue to be essential where technological resources are limited. The choice of technique should depend on the clinical case, available resources, and practitioner expertise.
Keywords: Restorative Dentistry, Dental Models, Digital Technology y
CAD/CAM Systems
Downloads
References
Autores: Pesce P NPCVZPCLIGe. 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. 2025; 14(1): p. 71. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/14/1/71.
Lemos CAA RRKENRCPRR. Intraoral scanning versus conventional methods for obtaining full arch implant supported prostheses: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Appl Sci. 2025; 15(2): p. 533. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/2/533.
Yilmaz B OEGB. Comparative clinical evaluation of digital versus conventional dental impression techniques in implant supported restorations. Prosthesis. 2025; 7(6): p. 135. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-1592/7/6/135.
Autores: Papaspyridakos P LKGPZRGKFTLe. 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. 2024; 33(5): p. 519 528. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40660725/.
Revilla León M ÖM. Are conventional impressions obsolete? A narrative review on the applicability of intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res. 2023; 67(2). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41178681/.
Neves FD dCLSALFACPMe. Patient reported outcomes of digital versus conventional impressions for implant supported fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2024; v. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4426/15/9/427.
Alqutaibi AY KKAAKMWAZM. Digital vs conventional implant impressions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. • Revista: J Prosthodont. J Prosthodont. 2020; 29(5). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32613641/.
De Moraes RR SPKTLBCMSMG. Clinical evaluation of digital impressions obtained by two intraoral scanners: an in vivo study. J Prosthodont Res. 2021; 65(4).https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=clinical+evaluation+digital+impressions+in+vivo.
Autores: Costa AR MJJWKYHCMF. Trueness and precision of 3 intraoral scanners in full arch and quadrant arch impressions: a comparative in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig. 2022; 26(2). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9221835/
Ender A MW. Accuracy of complete arch digital impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2021; 125(5). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23395338/
Autores: Ahlholm P SKVPJM. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: A review. J Prosthodont. 2021; 30(3). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27483210/
Joda T ZFFM. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review. BMC Oral Health. 2020; 20(1): p. 10.1186/s12903-020-01324-9. https://bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12903-020-01324-9
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alisson Lisbeth Barcia Orejuela, Sandra Sandoval

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