LAUSR

Background: A complete denture (CD) can be duplicated with a conventional or digital protocol. However, there are no comparative studies of these methods. This study aimed to compare the trueness and efficiency of conventional and digital CD duplication methods. Methods: A mandibular CD was digitized as the virtual reference model and duplicated using five methods (n = 10). The trueness (root mean square (RMS)) was calculated for the whole denture and across the dentition, cameo denture extension, and intaglio portions. The manual labor time spent during denture duplication was also recorded at different steps. The trueness and labor time comparisons were statistically analyzed among the five groups (α = 0.05). Results: The conventional group was the least true with the largest RMS (mean, 95% CI) in all of the comparisons. The four digital groups yielded similar trueness values across the dentition, cameo denture extension, and intaglio areas, yet they had a significant difference in the whole denture comparison between the Digital-CBCT-SLA printer (0.17, 0.15–0.19 mm) and Digital-Laboratory Scanner-SLA printer (0.13, 0.11–0.15 mm). The conventional protocol required longer trimming and finishing time (7.55 ± 1.02 min), as well as total labor time (27.64 ± 1.72 min) than the other four digital techniques. Conclusions: The conventional CD duplication method was less true and efficient than digital techniques.