Marginal adaptation of zirconia complete-coverage fixed dental restorations made from digital scans or conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Statement of problemIntraoral scanners have been increasingly used in recent years. However, the accuracy of digital scans as it affects marginal adaptation is unclear.PurposeThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the marginal adaptation of single-unit zirconia crowns fabricated with digital scans or with conventional impressions.Material and methodsThe electronic databases PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science (ISI), Scopus, and EMBASE were searched and complemented by a manual search. Risks of bias were assessed by using a modified methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS). Mean ±standard deviation (SD) values of marginal accuracy of studies were extracted for both methods. Mean marginal difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to evaluate the marginal accuracy of each method. Pooled data were statistically analyzed by using a random-effect model.ResultsSeventeen studies were used to perform the meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed based on intraoral scanners. Standardized mean marginal difference and 95% CI of each subgroup were as follows: Lava: -0.85 μm (95% CI: -1.67, -0.03) (P=.043); CEREC: -1.32 μm (95% CI: -2.06, -0.59) (P<.001); iTero: -0.44 μm (95% CI: -1.35, 0.47) (P=.338); TRIOS: -1.26 μm (95% CI: -2.02, -0.51) (P=.001); unknown scanner: -0.21 μm (95% CI: -1.14, 0.72); all studies: -0.89 μm (95% CI: -1.24, -0.54) (P<.001).ConclusionsDigital scanning of prepared teeth for single-unit zirconia restorations resulted in better marginal accuracy than conventional techniques using elastomeric impression materials.