This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of full-arch implant impressions by comparing photogrammetry and intraoral scanning techniques, through a systematic review and meta- analysis following the Cochrane protocol. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science until May 2024. Keywords based on the PICO question were used without time or language restrictions. In vitro studies assessing full-arch implant rehabilitations that compared photogrammetry with intraoral scanning were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quin Tool Method. Data were analyzed through meta- analysis in RevMan (Review Manager Cochrane), grouping the results into three subgroups: angle deviation (°), precision (μm), and trueness (μm). The search yielded 6348 studies; 11 met the eligibility criteria, and 7 provided sufficient data for quantitative meta-analysis. Photogrammetry demonstrated superior precision, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.03 (95% CI: -0.04, -0.02) and a high weight of 94.2%, indicating consistent evidence. For angle deviation (MD = -0.12, 95% CI: -0.16, -0.08, P < 0.00001) and trueness (MD = -0.16, 95% CI: -0.19, -0.13, P < 0.00001), the photogrammetry group also showed favorable results. Although trueness exhibited expressive mean difference values, it had a lower overall weight (5.8%). Within the limitations of this study, photogrammetry significantly improves the accuracy of full arch implant rehabilitations compared to intraoral scanning. These findings support the adoption of photogrammetry for more accurate and consistent outcomes in dental implant procedures.
