Applicability of the reverse scan body technique for the fabrication of implant-supported prostheses: a scoping review

Camila Nogueira Chamma-Wedemann; Renato Sartori Lardin Sanchez; Pedro Silva Pacheco; Marcio Katsuyoshi Mukai; Newton Sesma; Emily  Vivianne Freitas da Silva

doi:10.4322/bds.2026.e4974

Authors

Camila Nogueira Chamma-Wedemann Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6580-1517
Renato Sartori Lardin Sanchez Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3477-9913
Pedro Silva Pacheco Dentist, private practice. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9900-3118
Marcio Katsuyoshi Mukai Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1608-7051
Newton Sesma Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5044-1742
Emily Vivianne Freitas da Silva Universidade de São Paulo. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0164-1788

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4322/bds.2026.e4974

Abstract

Scanning edentulous regions rehabilitated with implants presents significant challenges and necessitates innovative solutions. The development of the reverse scan body technique (RST) has enabled scanning to be performed outside the oral environment. Objective: This scoping review examined the RST, critically evaluating the findings in the literature regarding its advantages and disadvantages in terms of working time and patient comfort, passive fit of prostheses on abutments, precision and accuracy of the RST. Material and Methods: Following the PRISMA protocol, the search was conducted until July 2025 (MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science) by two independent reviewers (RSLS,PSP) and one expert (CNCW). Objective data were analyzed without random-effects meta-analysis. Results: Four in vitro studies and eight technical reports were included in the analysis (kappa = 0.875). A trend has been observed favoring this technique in full arches to replicate the dimensions of the provisional prosthesis, soft tissue information, and verification jig device, with reported advantages in terms of patient comfort and working time. RST performed with the E4 RED scanner demonstrated superior measurements of trueness (65 ± 43 μm) and precision (18 ± 11 μm) compared to those of IOS. The Procrustes distance values recorded for RST intraoral (median 9.5 μm) exhibited a significant difference when compared to the Control group (median 0.3 μm). Owing to the paucity of evidence regarding the RST as the primary focus, additional research is necessary to obtain robust data. Conclusion: The potential applicability of the RST for the fabrication of implant-supported prostheses appears promising.

KEYWORDS

Digital impression; Digital workflow; Implant scanning; Implant-supported prosthesis; Reverse scan body.