Digitally versus conventionally fabricated complete dentures: An overview of systematic reviews on patient-reported...

Several systematic reviews have investigated the clinical performance and patient-reported outcomes of conventionally and digitally fabricated complete dentures, with conflicting results. An overview of these studies is needed.

The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the scientific evidence and evaluate the methodological quality of secondary studies on the clinical performance, patient-reported outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of conventionally and digitally fabricated complete dentures.

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) guidelines and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD420251036474). A systematic search was conducted in 6 electronic databases up to August 2025 for satisfaction, quality of life, postinsertion visits, clinical performance, costs, and time efficiency. The methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2-tools and risk of bias using ROBIS.

A total of 9 systematic reviews were included. Among these, 4 conducted meta-analyses. Both conventionally and digitally fabricated dentures yielded comparable results in terms of overall satisfaction and quality of life. Digitally fabricated dentures were time- and cost-effective, with better retention than conventionally fabricated dentures. A total of 88.9% of the reviews demonstrated a low level of methodological confidence, and only 1 had a high risk of bias.

Digitally fabricated dentures can be considered clinically suitable alternatives, with similar or better performance than conventionally fabricated dentures. Given the limited methodological evidence of the included reviews, the interpretation of findings requires caution. Decision-making remains uncertain, particularly for esthetics, phonetics, adaptation, stability, masticatory efficiency, patient treatment preference, and postdelivery clinical visits.