Clinical outcomes of milled, 3D‐printed, and conventional complete dentures in edentulous patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractPurposeThis systematic review aims to compare clinical outcomes of digital dentures with conventional dentures.Materials and MethodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered in Prospero. The formulated population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question was “What is the clinical outcome of digital versus conventional complete dentures (CDs) in edentulous patients?”. The search strategy used three main electronic databases and an additional manual search was completed in August 2023 by following an established search strategy. Initial inclusion was based on titles and abstracts, followed by a detailed review of selected studies, and clinical studies that evaluated the clinical outcome of digital (milled or 3D‐printed) versus conventional CDs were included. A qualitative analysis for clinical studies was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence was assessed according to the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) system. In addition, a single‐arm meta‐analysis was performed to evaluate the retention between digital versus conventional CDs.ResultsThe initial search yielded a total of 947 articles, out of which 19 were selected for a comprehensive review, and six met the eligibility criteria to be included in this systematic review. The computer‐aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD‐CAM) CDs showed increased retention, no relevant differences in oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL), and shorter working time compared to conventional dentures. Two studies were eligible for meta‐analysis; retention was significantly better among CAD‐CAM fabricated dentures (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.501) than conventional dentures. The heterogeneity between studies was high (95% CI: 0.049–0.952).ConclusionsClinically, both the milled and the 3D‐printed CD fared better than conventional dentures in terms of retention, reduction in the number of appointments, improved patient comfort, and improved predictable maintenance of the denture. Patients' perceptions and satisfaction were independent of the digital and conventional fabricated dentures.