aceFully Automated Artificial Intelligence-Based Design Single Tooth-Supported Dental Crowns: A Systematic Review of Efficiency, Fit, and Morphological Accuracy
Abstract Fully automated artificial intelligence (AI)-based dental crown design has recently emerged as an alternative to conventional workflows, including technician-assisted digital design and traditional wax-up techniques. However, the available evidence remains heterogeneous, and no clear consensus exists regarding its performance in terms of time efficiency, fit, and morphological accuracy. We aimed to systematically evaluate whether fully automated AI-based crown design provides comparable or superior outc…
Fully automated AI design of single dental crowns consistently reduced working time versus conventional digital or wax-up workflows while keeping marginal gap and internal fit generally within clinically acceptable limits.
Evidence does not show AI is systematically superior: morphological accuracy results were mixed, and the studies were heterogeneous and largely in vitro under idealized conditions.
The evidence base is heterogeneous, with inconsistent outcome definitions, varied software and evaluation protocols, and mostly in vitro studies under idealized conditions, so clinical superiority cannot be concluded.
Evidence
- Peer-reviewedEuropean Journal of Dentistry2026-10-08
How should this claim be treated?
Truvace Impact Record TRV-2026-1691, v1: “Fully Automated Artificial Intelligence-Based Design Single Tooth-Supported Dental Crowns: A Systematic Review of Efficiency, Fit, and Morphological Accuracy.” Truvace, 2026-10-17. /record/TRV-2026-1691 (accessed at citation time). sha256 981ed3a10bb52783…
Calibration history
Every change to this record since certification, in the open. None yet — the reading has held since it entered the record.
Certified into the record
How to verify without trusting this page
Fetch the canonical text of any version from /api/record/TRV-2026-1691 and hash it yourself — for example shasum -a 256 on the saved canonical field. The result must equal content_hash, and each version’s text ends with prev:followed by the prior version’s hash (version 1 chains to 64 zeros). If a single character of any version had been altered since certification, the chain would not reproduce.