Accuracy of Photogrammetry in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Introduction: Precise transfer of implant positions is critical for the success of full-arch rehabilitations. Photogrammetry-based workflows aim to mitigate the cumulative stitching errors common in intraoral scanning (IOS), though performance varies across different systems and protocols. To evaluate the accuracy (trueness and precision) of photogrammetry for edentulous complete-arch implant capture compared to IOS and conventional impressions. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase were searched for publications from 2010 through 2025; the final search was run on January 15, 2026. Forty-eight studies (11 clinical/in vivo and 37 in vitro) assessing photogrammetry in full-arch scenarios (≥4 implants) were included. Primary outcomes were linear, angular, and 3D deviations. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2 or setting-specific modifications, and certainty was assessed by outcome domain using GRADE. Owing to methodological heterogeneity, a qualitative synthesis and risk-of-bias-stratified robustness analysis were performed. Results: Forty-eight studies were included. Overall risk of bias was low in 3 studies (6.3%), raised some concerns in 37 (77.1%), and was high in 8 (16.7%). The seven formal GRADE outcome domains were rated moderate (n = 1), low (n = 3), or very low certainty (n = 3). The only moderate-certainty domain—clinical precision of photogrammetry versus IOS—was based on correlated endpoints from one 19-participant cross-over study, which reported lower mean 3D spatial-fit deviation with photogrammetry (7 ± 5 μm) than IOS (61 ± 54 μm). Laboratory trueness and precision findings were mixed and protocol-dependent. Conclusion: Photogrammetry may provide a precision advantage in selected complete-arch workflows, but the evidence does not establish consistent clinical superiority over IOS or conventional impressions. Confidence is limited by the predominance of studies with methodological concerns, indirect laboratory evidence, protocol heterogeneity, and reliance on single studies for several outcome claims. Device- and protocol-specific verification remains necessary pending independent clinical comparisons linked to prosthesis-level outcomes.Keywords: Photogrammetry; Dental implants; Dental impression technique; Edentulous mouth; Dental prosthesis; Implant-supported.
1. Altalla H, Alhelou H, Karaduman F, Alawawda O, Bayindir F. Comparative accuracy of photogrammetry and intraoral scanners in recordings for complete arch implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
2. Cheng J, Zhang H, Liu H, Li J, Wang H, Tao X. Accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(5):560–72.
3. Negreiros WM, Akhondi S, Quiles HK, Hamilton A. Photogrammetry in Implant Dentistry. Aust Dent J. 2025;70(S1):S15–S24.
4. Pozzi A, Arcuri L, Carosi P, Laureti A, Londono J, Wang H-L. Photogrammetry Versus Intraoral Scanning in Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(3):e70059.
5. Abuduwaili K, Huang R, Song J, Liu Y, Chen Z, Huang B, et al. Comparison of photogrammetric imaging, intraoral scanning and conventional impression accuracy of full-arch dental implant rehabilitation: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):753.
6. Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Agustín-Panadero R, Bagán L, Giménez B, Peñarrocha M. Impression of multiple implants using photogrammetry: description of technique and case presentation. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2014;19(4):e366–71.
7. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak A, Att W, Kois J, et al. Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;133(1):252–7.
8. Revilla-León M, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Capturing complete arch implant positions in two partial photogrammetry scans: Does it impact the accuracy of complete arch implant scans? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
9. Revilla-León M, Cascos-Sanchez R, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using intraoral and extraoral photogrammetry systems and a noncalibrated splinting technique: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
10. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak A, Guinot-Barona C, Att W, et al. Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system. J Dent. 2024;142:5.
11. Fu X, Cai Z, Shi J, Qiao S, Tonetti M, Lai H, et al. Accuracy of a Novel Intraoral Photogrammetry Technique for Complete-Arch Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2025;36(8):991–9.
12. Estibalez-Recasens M, Serrano-Granger C, Santamaría-Laorden A, Andreu-Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Precision of stereophotogrammetry in complete arch implant recordings: A clinical study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2025;133(5):1242–9.
13. Faria JC, Sampaio-Fernandes MA, Oliveira SJ, Malheiro R, Sampaio-Fernandes JC, Figueiral MH. Precision of Photogrammetry and Intraoral Scanning in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: An In Vitro Comparative Study. Applied Sciences. 2025;15(3):1388.
14. Jiranaphawiboon A, Rokaya D, Sanohkan S. Accuracy of one-versus two-phase photogrammetry implant impression system: an in-vitro study. The Saudi Dental Journal. 2025;37(7):42.
15. Lohatchwanit S, Narkbuakaew W, Aunmeungtong W, Khongkhunthian P. The accuracy of stereophotogrammetric, intraoral scanning, and conventional open-tray impression techniques for complete arch fixed implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. Digital Dentistry Journal. 2025;2(2):100035.
16. Muslu T, Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S. Effect of implant angulation on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanning and photogrammetry. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):1739.
17. Yan Y, Lin X, Yue X, Geng W. Accuracy of 2 direct digital scanning techniques-intraoral scanning and stereophotogrammetry-for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: A prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(4):564–72.
18. Santamaría-Laorden A, Castillo-De-Oyagüe R, Martínez-Marugán A, Andreu‑Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Accuracy of a smartphone app and photogrammetry algorithm in complete arch digital implant capture: An in vivo comparative study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
19. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Clinical accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using a noncalibrated splinting technique, intraoral photogrammetry, and extraoral photogrammetry with snap-on markers. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
20. Eldabe AK, Adel-Khattab D, Botros KH. Accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry in complete arch digital implant scanning: An in vivo prospective comparative study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
21. Fu XJ, Liu M, Liu BL, Tonetti MS, Shi JY, Lai HC. Accuracy of intraoral scan with prefabricated aids and stereophotogrammetry compared with open tray impressions for complete-arch implant-supported prosthesis: A clinical study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(8):830–40.
22. Zhang YJ, Qian SJ, Lai HC, Shi JY. Accuracy of photogrammetric imaging versus conventional impressions for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A comparative clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(2):212–8.
23. Orejas-Pérez J, Giménez González B, Ortiz-Collado I, Thuissard-Vasallo IJ, Santamaría-Laorden A. In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(7).
24. Wang J, Wu Y, Ma J, Wu F, Li D. A novel technique for implant-supported fixed complete rehabilitation based on a dynamic virtual patient. J Dent. 2023;137:5.
25. Negreiros W, Sun T, Jain S, Finkelman M, Gallucci G, Hamilton A. Precision of complete-arch digital implant scans using photogrammetry and intra-oral scanning. An in vivo cross-over study Complete-Arch Implant Scans: Photogrammetry vs IOS. J Dent. 2025;161:10.
26. Pinto R, Casado S, Chmielewski K, Carames J, Marques D. Accuracy of different digital acquisition methods in complete arch implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(1):172–7.
27. Tohme H, Lawand G, Eid R, Ahmed K, Salameh Z, Makzoume J. Accuracy of Implant Level Intraoral Scanning and Photogrammetry Impression Techniques in a Complete Arch with Angled and Parallel Implants: An In Vitro Study. Appl Sci-Basel. 2021;11(21):11.
28. Revilla-León M, Att W, Özcan M, Rubenstein J. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(3):470–8.
29. Pozzi A, Laureti A, Tawil I, Chow J, Azevedo L, Fehmer V, et al. Intra Oral Photogrammetry: Trueness Evaluation of Novel Technology for Implant Complete-Arch Digital Impression In Vitro. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(3).
30. Revilla-León M, Rubenstein J, Methani M, Piedra-Cascón W, Özcan M, Att W. Trueness and precision of complete-arch photogrammetry implant scanning assessed with a coordinate-measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(1):160–5.
31. Demirel M, Donmez M, Sahmali S. Trueness and precision of mandibular complete-arch implant scans when different data acquisition methods are used. J Dent. 2023;138:7.
32. Lyu M, Li Y, Xu D, Xing Q, Zhang S, Yuan Q. Accuracy of Photogrammetry, Intraoral Scanning, and Conventional Impression for Multiple Implants: An In Vitro Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(1).
33. Tohme H, Lawand G, Chmielewska M, Makhzoume J. Comparison between stereophotogrammetric, digital, and conventional impression techniques in implant-supported fixed complete arch prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(2):354–62.
34. Benabdallah-M'Rabat M, Santamaria-Laorden A, Bertuol-Gessi S, Martínez-Marugán A, Suarez-Garcia A, Thuissard I, et al. Influence of camera position, implant angulation and implant reference on the accuracy of complete arch implant recordings with photogrammetry. J Adv Prosthodont. 2025;17(5):292–303.
35. Gómez-Polo M, Revilla-León M, Herranz-Seijo P, Antonaya-Martín JL, Barmak AB, Cascos R. Do ambient lighting conditions affect the accuracy of implant position capture for complete arch prostheses using intraoral photogrammetry? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
36. Bin Farrah A, Ahmadian L, Shonberg D, Harlow R, Yang B. Effect of angulation between multi-unit abutments on trueness of photogrammetry systems. J Prosthodont. 2025:8.
37. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak AB, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using intraoral and extraoral photogrammetry systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
38. Ke Y, Zhang Y, Tian S, Chen H, Sun Y. Accuracy of digital implant impressions using a novel structured light scanning system assisted by a planar mirror in the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(8):876–87.
39. Zhou Y, You L, Fan Z. Accuracy of implant abutment level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws: an in vitro pilot study. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1).
40. Brakoc J, Todorovic A, Mangano F, Glisic M, Scepanovic M. Accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry versus direct digital implant impressions in the fully edentulous lower jaw: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2025;156:8.
41. Liu M, Fu XJ, Lai HC, Shi JY, Liu BL. Accuracy of traditional open-tray impression, stereophotogrammetry, and intraoral scanning with prefabricated aids for implant-supported complete arch prostheses with different implant distributions: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(3):602–.e9.
42. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak A, Kois J, Gómez-Polo M. Alignment accuracy of soft tissue and implant position scans captured by using four intraoral scanners and an intraoral photogrammetry system with and without coded healing abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(4):10.
43. Sallorenzo A, Gomez-Polo M. Comparative study of the accuracy of an implant intraoral scanner and that of a conventional intraoral scanner for-arch fixed dental. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128(5):1009–16.
44. Santamaría-Laorden A, Marugán A, Andreu-Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Complete arch implant capture using a photogrammetry algorithm and smartphone app: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2025;161:8.
45. Revilla-León M, Barmak AB, Rokhshad R, Lawand G, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Does the interimplant scan body distance impact the scanning accuracy of an intraoral photogrammetry system? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
46. Bratos M, Bergin J, Rubenstein J, Sorensen J. Effect of simulated intraoral variables on the accuracy of a photogrammetric imaging technique for complete-arch implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(2):232–41.
47. Chen Y, Zhu M, He B, Deng Z. Efficient intraoral photogrammetry using self-identifying projective invariant marker. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2024;19(4):767–78.
48. Pozzi A, Arcuri L, Laureti A, Carosi P, Gallucci G, Londono J. Image-guided photogrammetry accuracy: In vitro evaluation of an implant-supported complete arch digital scanning technology. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(3):818–28.
49. Bergin JM, Rubenstein J, Mancl L, Brudvik JS, Raigrodski AJ. An in vitro comparison of photogrammetric and conventional complete-arch implant impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(4):243–51.
50. Revilla-León M, Barmak A, Lanis A, Kois J. Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(3):800–8.
51. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak AB, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Registration accuracy of soft tissue information scan captured using an intraoral scanner and implant position scan recorded using extraoral and intraoral photogrammetry systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
52. Faria JC, Sampaio-Fernandes MA, Oliveira SJ, Malheiro R, Sampaio-Fernandes JC, Figueiral MH. Trueness of Implant Positioning Using Intraoral Scanning and Dental Photogrammetry for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Rehabilitations: An In Vitro Study. Appl Sci. 2025;15(14).
53. Ma J, Zhang B, Song H, Wu D, Song T. Accuracy of digital implant impressions obtained using intraoral scanners: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vivo studies. International Journal of Implant Dentistry. 2023;9(1):48.
54. Pesce P, Nicolini P, Caponio VCA, Zecca PA, Canullo L, Isola G, et al. 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. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025;14(1):71.
55. Abdelrehim A, Etajuri EA, Sulaiman E, Sofian H, Salleh NM. Magnitude of misfit threshold in implant-supported restorations: A systematic review. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2024;132(3):528–35.
56. Prott LS, Atria PJ, Maluf CV, Blatz MB, Conejo J. In vitro comparison between complete arch abutment-level implant impressions with photogrammetry, grammetry, and intraoral scanning. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134:782.e1-782.e7. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.05.009.
2. Cheng J, Zhang H, Liu H, Li J, Wang H, Tao X. Accuracy of edentulous full-arch implant impression: An in vitro comparison between conventional impression, intraoral scan with and without splinting, and photogrammetry. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(5):560–72.
3. Negreiros WM, Akhondi S, Quiles HK, Hamilton A. Photogrammetry in Implant Dentistry. Aust Dent J. 2025;70(S1):S15–S24.
4. Pozzi A, Arcuri L, Carosi P, Laureti A, Londono J, Wang H-L. Photogrammetry Versus Intraoral Scanning in Complete-Arch Digital Implant Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(3):e70059.
5. Abuduwaili K, Huang R, Song J, Liu Y, Chen Z, Huang B, et al. Comparison of photogrammetric imaging, intraoral scanning and conventional impression accuracy of full-arch dental implant rehabilitation: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):753.
6. Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Agustín-Panadero R, Bagán L, Giménez B, Peñarrocha M. Impression of multiple implants using photogrammetry: description of technique and case presentation. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2014;19(4):e366–71.
7. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak A, Att W, Kois J, et al. Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;133(1):252–7.
8. Revilla-León M, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Capturing complete arch implant positions in two partial photogrammetry scans: Does it impact the accuracy of complete arch implant scans? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
9. Revilla-León M, Cascos-Sanchez R, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using intraoral and extraoral photogrammetry systems and a noncalibrated splinting technique: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
10. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak A, Guinot-Barona C, Att W, et al. Impact of scanning distance on the accuracy of a photogrammetry system. J Dent. 2024;142:5.
11. Fu X, Cai Z, Shi J, Qiao S, Tonetti M, Lai H, et al. Accuracy of a Novel Intraoral Photogrammetry Technique for Complete-Arch Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2025;36(8):991–9.
12. Estibalez-Recasens M, Serrano-Granger C, Santamaría-Laorden A, Andreu-Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Precision of stereophotogrammetry in complete arch implant recordings: A clinical study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2025;133(5):1242–9.
13. Faria JC, Sampaio-Fernandes MA, Oliveira SJ, Malheiro R, Sampaio-Fernandes JC, Figueiral MH. Precision of Photogrammetry and Intraoral Scanning in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: An In Vitro Comparative Study. Applied Sciences. 2025;15(3):1388.
14. Jiranaphawiboon A, Rokaya D, Sanohkan S. Accuracy of one-versus two-phase photogrammetry implant impression system: an in-vitro study. The Saudi Dental Journal. 2025;37(7):42.
15. Lohatchwanit S, Narkbuakaew W, Aunmeungtong W, Khongkhunthian P. The accuracy of stereophotogrammetric, intraoral scanning, and conventional open-tray impression techniques for complete arch fixed implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. Digital Dentistry Journal. 2025;2(2):100035.
16. Muslu T, Kurtulmus-Yilmaz S. Effect of implant angulation on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanning and photogrammetry. BMC Oral Health. 2025;25(1):1739.
17. Yan Y, Lin X, Yue X, Geng W. Accuracy of 2 direct digital scanning techniques-intraoral scanning and stereophotogrammetry-for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses: A prospective study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(4):564–72.
18. Santamaría-Laorden A, Castillo-De-Oyagüe R, Martínez-Marugán A, Andreu‑Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Accuracy of a smartphone app and photogrammetry algorithm in complete arch digital implant capture: An in vivo comparative study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
19. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak AB, Drone M, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Clinical accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using a noncalibrated splinting technique, intraoral photogrammetry, and extraoral photogrammetry with snap-on markers. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
20. Eldabe AK, Adel-Khattab D, Botros KH. Accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry in complete arch digital implant scanning: An in vivo prospective comparative study. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
21. Fu XJ, Liu M, Liu BL, Tonetti MS, Shi JY, Lai HC. Accuracy of intraoral scan with prefabricated aids and stereophotogrammetry compared with open tray impressions for complete-arch implant-supported prosthesis: A clinical study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(8):830–40.
22. Zhang YJ, Qian SJ, Lai HC, Shi JY. Accuracy of photogrammetric imaging versus conventional impressions for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A comparative clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;130(2):212–8.
23. Orejas-Pérez J, Giménez González B, Ortiz-Collado I, Thuissard-Vasallo IJ, Santamaría-Laorden A. In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(7).
24. Wang J, Wu Y, Ma J, Wu F, Li D. A novel technique for implant-supported fixed complete rehabilitation based on a dynamic virtual patient. J Dent. 2023;137:5.
25. Negreiros W, Sun T, Jain S, Finkelman M, Gallucci G, Hamilton A. Precision of complete-arch digital implant scans using photogrammetry and intra-oral scanning. An in vivo cross-over study Complete-Arch Implant Scans: Photogrammetry vs IOS. J Dent. 2025;161:10.
26. Pinto R, Casado S, Chmielewski K, Carames J, Marques D. Accuracy of different digital acquisition methods in complete arch implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(1):172–7.
27. Tohme H, Lawand G, Eid R, Ahmed K, Salameh Z, Makzoume J. Accuracy of Implant Level Intraoral Scanning and Photogrammetry Impression Techniques in a Complete Arch with Angled and Parallel Implants: An In Vitro Study. Appl Sci-Basel. 2021;11(21):11.
28. Revilla-León M, Att W, Özcan M, Rubenstein J. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(3):470–8.
29. Pozzi A, Laureti A, Tawil I, Chow J, Azevedo L, Fehmer V, et al. Intra Oral Photogrammetry: Trueness Evaluation of Novel Technology for Implant Complete-Arch Digital Impression In Vitro. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(3).
30. Revilla-León M, Rubenstein J, Methani M, Piedra-Cascón W, Özcan M, Att W. Trueness and precision of complete-arch photogrammetry implant scanning assessed with a coordinate-measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(1):160–5.
31. Demirel M, Donmez M, Sahmali S. Trueness and precision of mandibular complete-arch implant scans when different data acquisition methods are used. J Dent. 2023;138:7.
32. Lyu M, Li Y, Xu D, Xing Q, Zhang S, Yuan Q. Accuracy of Photogrammetry, Intraoral Scanning, and Conventional Impression for Multiple Implants: An In Vitro Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2025;27(1).
33. Tohme H, Lawand G, Chmielewska M, Makhzoume J. Comparison between stereophotogrammetric, digital, and conventional impression techniques in implant-supported fixed complete arch prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(2):354–62.
34. Benabdallah-M'Rabat M, Santamaria-Laorden A, Bertuol-Gessi S, Martínez-Marugán A, Suarez-Garcia A, Thuissard I, et al. Influence of camera position, implant angulation and implant reference on the accuracy of complete arch implant recordings with photogrammetry. J Adv Prosthodont. 2025;17(5):292–303.
35. Gómez-Polo M, Revilla-León M, Herranz-Seijo P, Antonaya-Martín JL, Barmak AB, Cascos R. Do ambient lighting conditions affect the accuracy of implant position capture for complete arch prostheses using intraoral photogrammetry? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
36. Bin Farrah A, Ahmadian L, Shonberg D, Harlow R, Yang B. Effect of angulation between multi-unit abutments on trueness of photogrammetry systems. J Prosthodont. 2025:8.
37. Revilla-León M, Gómez-Polo M, Drone M, Barmak AB, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Accuracy of complete arch implant scans recorded by using intraoral and extraoral photogrammetry systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
38. Ke Y, Zhang Y, Tian S, Chen H, Sun Y. Accuracy of digital implant impressions using a novel structured light scanning system assisted by a planar mirror in the edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2024;35(8):876–87.
39. Zhou Y, You L, Fan Z. Accuracy of implant abutment level digital impressions using stereophotogrammetry in edentulous jaws: an in vitro pilot study. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1).
40. Brakoc J, Todorovic A, Mangano F, Glisic M, Scepanovic M. Accuracy of intraoral photogrammetry versus direct digital implant impressions in the fully edentulous lower jaw: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2025;156:8.
41. Liu M, Fu XJ, Lai HC, Shi JY, Liu BL. Accuracy of traditional open-tray impression, stereophotogrammetry, and intraoral scanning with prefabricated aids for implant-supported complete arch prostheses with different implant distributions: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2024;132(3):602–.e9.
42. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak A, Kois J, Gómez-Polo M. Alignment accuracy of soft tissue and implant position scans captured by using four intraoral scanners and an intraoral photogrammetry system with and without coded healing abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(4):10.
43. Sallorenzo A, Gomez-Polo M. Comparative study of the accuracy of an implant intraoral scanner and that of a conventional intraoral scanner for-arch fixed dental. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128(5):1009–16.
44. Santamaría-Laorden A, Marugán A, Andreu-Vázquez C, Orejas-Pérez J. Complete arch implant capture using a photogrammetry algorithm and smartphone app: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2025;161:8.
45. Revilla-León M, Barmak AB, Rokhshad R, Lawand G, Kois JC, Alonso Pérez-Barquero J. Does the interimplant scan body distance impact the scanning accuracy of an intraoral photogrammetry system? J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
46. Bratos M, Bergin J, Rubenstein J, Sorensen J. Effect of simulated intraoral variables on the accuracy of a photogrammetric imaging technique for complete-arch implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(2):232–41.
47. Chen Y, Zhu M, He B, Deng Z. Efficient intraoral photogrammetry using self-identifying projective invariant marker. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2024;19(4):767–78.
48. Pozzi A, Arcuri L, Laureti A, Carosi P, Gallucci G, Londono J. Image-guided photogrammetry accuracy: In vitro evaluation of an implant-supported complete arch digital scanning technology. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(3):818–28.
49. Bergin JM, Rubenstein J, Mancl L, Brudvik JS, Raigrodski AJ. An in vitro comparison of photogrammetric and conventional complete-arch implant impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(4):243–51.
50. Revilla-León M, Barmak A, Lanis A, Kois J. Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134(3):800–8.
51. Revilla-León M, Cascos R, Barmak AB, Kois JC, Gómez-Polo M. Registration accuracy of soft tissue information scan captured using an intraoral scanner and implant position scan recorded using extraoral and intraoral photogrammetry systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2025.
52. Faria JC, Sampaio-Fernandes MA, Oliveira SJ, Malheiro R, Sampaio-Fernandes JC, Figueiral MH. Trueness of Implant Positioning Using Intraoral Scanning and Dental Photogrammetry for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Rehabilitations: An In Vitro Study. Appl Sci. 2025;15(14).
53. Ma J, Zhang B, Song H, Wu D, Song T. Accuracy of digital implant impressions obtained using intraoral scanners: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vivo studies. International Journal of Implant Dentistry. 2023;9(1):48.
54. Pesce P, Nicolini P, Caponio VCA, Zecca PA, Canullo L, Isola G, et al. 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. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025;14(1):71.
55. Abdelrehim A, Etajuri EA, Sulaiman E, Sofian H, Salleh NM. Magnitude of misfit threshold in implant-supported restorations: A systematic review. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2024;132(3):528–35.
56. Prott LS, Atria PJ, Maluf CV, Blatz MB, Conejo J. In vitro comparison between complete arch abutment-level implant impressions with photogrammetry, grammetry, and intraoral scanning. J Prosthet Dent. 2025;134:782.e1-782.e7. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.05.009.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 13, No 3 (Summer 2026) | |
| Section | Review Article(s) | |
| Keywords | ||
| Photogrammetry; Dental implants; Dental impression technique; Edentulous mouth; Dental prosthesis; Implant-supported. | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
How to Cite
1.
Mokhtari A, Mirzaei A, Ghaffarian Hosseini A, Mirmortazavi A. Accuracy of Photogrammetry in Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review. J Craniomaxillofac Res. 2026;13(3):289-310.
