Abstract
Objectives: This systematic review compares computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) 3D-printed complete dentures (CDs) with conventional ones in terms of patient satisfaction. Methods: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) reporting criteria for systematic reviews were followed in conducting this systematic review. The study question was "What are the patient satisfaction outcomes of 3D-printed versus conventional CDs in edentulous patients?" according to the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework. A comprehensive electronic search was conducted across three databases (PubMed/Medline, Web of Science core collection, and Scopus; last update: 18 August 2024) to obtain clinical trials that compared traditional and 3D-printed CDs. The retrieved articles were screened, their data were extracted, and their quality was evaluated. Results: The initial search retrieved 803 publications; 12 were chosen for a thorough review, and 5 of them-4 randomized cross-over studies and 1 randomized three-parallel arm study-met the requirements for this systematic review. One study showed significant differences in five of nine patient denture satisfaction domains, positively favoring the conventional CDs. Two studies showed non-significant differences in satisfaction domains between the conventional and 3D-printed groups, except for aesthetics and pronunciation. On the contrary, the satisfaction scores in two other studies showed no significant difference between the conventional and 3D-printed denture groups. Conclusions: The analysis of the included studies and evidence gathered demonstrates that CAD/CAM 3D-printed CDs seem to be comparable with conventional CDs in terms of overall patient satisfaction; however, 3D-printed CDs generate some concerns related to aesthetics and speech.