evidencegaps
Primary study · included by 1 review

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Single Implant-Supported Zirconia Crowns Following a Digital and Conventional Workflow: Four-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Beck 2024 · Beck Florian, Zupancic Cepic Lana, Lettner Stefan, et al. · Journal of Clinical Medicine · 2024

Included by

Clinical Effectiveness and Accuracy of Fully Digital Workflows Versus Conventional Methods in Implant-Supported Restorations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Non-Cochrane · intervention · 2026 · cited as Beck 2024 · Table 1; reference 38; Results
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Implant survival (implant failure)
Fully digital workflow (intraoral scanning) vs Conventional workflow (elastomeric impression) · 1 to 4 years
RR 1.00 [0.98, 1.02]4 studies · 202 participantsHigh
Marginal bone loss
Fully digital workflow (intraoral scanning) vs Conventional workflow (elastomeric impression)
mean MBL digital 0.52 mm vs conventional 0.61 mm; not statistically significant3 studiesGRADE not reported

1 including review in total.