J Prosthet Dent. 2026 Mar 17:S0022-3913(26)00139-3. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2026.02.034. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The accuracy of complete arch implant scans acquired using intraoral scanners (IOSs) has been extensively examined; however, these evaluations often disregard the influence of the scanning technique used to capture implant positions.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the trueness and precision of complete arch implant scans recorded using nonsplinting techniques.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was completed in 5 databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane. A manual search was also conducted. Studies analyzing the accuracy of complete arch scans using commercially available nonsplinting techniques recorded with IOSs were included. Two investigators evaluated the studies independently by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal. A third examiner was consulted to resolve any lack of consensus. The mean and standard deviation of the accuracy values reported were extracted, and a meta-analysis was performed. The mean difference between the analog and nonsplinting groups was calculated using the random effect model (a=.05). The I-squared (I2) statistic and its associated P value were used to assess the heterogeneity between studies. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. The Egger test was used to determine the significance of the funnel plots.
RESULTS: A total of 100 articles were included. The linear discrepancy ranged from 22 to 1050 µm, with a mean linear discrepancy of 117 µm. The angular discrepancy values ranged from 0.01 to 1.75 degrees, with a mean angular discrepancy of 0.48 degrees. The reported linear trueness ranged from 41 to 557 µm, with a mean linear trueness of 153 µm. The linear precision ranged from 7 to 166 µm, with a mean linear precision of 57 µm. The angular trueness ranged from 0.20 to 1.69 degrees, with a mean angular trueness of 0.65 degrees. The angular precision ranged from 0.05 to 1.69 degrees, with a mean angular precision of 0.41 degrees. The mean RMS discrepancy ranged from 9 to 408 µm, with a mean RMS error of 101 µm. The RMS trueness ranged from 27 to 366 µm, with a mean RMS error of 60 µm. Lastly, the RMS precision ranged from 5 to 251 µm, with a mean RMS error of 35 µm. The funnel plots and Egger regression asymmetry tests revealed significant publication bias (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Nonsplinting implant scanning techniques demonstrated high variability in the scanning accuracy outcomes. Further clinical studies are needed to evaluate the accuracy of implant scans, as substantial heterogeneity was observed among the included studies.
PMID:41850947 | DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2026.02.034
