CAD/CAM Dentistry Explained: How It Works & Why It Matters

Option	Pros	Cons	Best for
Chairside CAD/CAM (In-Office Milling) e.g. CEREC (Dentsply Sirona), Planmeca FIT, Glidewell Fastmill.io Typical chairside system investment ranges from roughly $100,000–$200,000+ depending on scanner and mill configuration; prices vary by vendor and market — confirm current pricing directly with manufacturers.	Same-day restoration delivery — no temporary required Eliminates physical impression and lab turnaround Digital case data stored for easy reproduction	High upfront capital cost (scanner + mill + furnace) Operator learning curve for scanning and design Block inventory management adds overhead Material choices narrower than full-service lab	Practices with high crown volume seeking to differentiate on patient experience and reduce lab fees over time
Lab-Based CAD/CAM e.g. Dentsply Sirona inLab, Straumann CARES, Roland DWX series Per-unit lab fees vary widely by restoration type, material, and lab — request itemised fee schedules from your lab partner.	Access to industrial-grade milling accuracy Broader material range including high-translucency zirconia No in-office capital investment for fabrication equipment Technician expertise applied to complex cases	Two-appointment workflow — temporary required Turnaround time of days to weeks depending on lab Physical impressions or scan files must be transmitted accurately	Practices that prefer to focus clinical time on preparation and cementation, or those with lower crown volume where in-office milling ROI is harder to justify

Option

Pros

Cons

Best for

Chairside CAD/CAM (In-Office Milling)

e.g. CEREC (Dentsply Sirona), Planmeca FIT, Glidewell Fastmill.io

Typical chairside system investment ranges from roughly $100,000–$200,000+ depending on scanner and mill configuration; prices vary by vendor and market — confirm current pricing directly with manufacturers.

Same-day restoration delivery — no temporary required
Eliminates physical impression and lab turnaround
Digital case data stored for easy reproduction

High upfront capital cost (scanner + mill + furnace)
Operator learning curve for scanning and design
Block inventory management adds overhead
Material choices narrower than full-service lab

Practices with high crown volume seeking to differentiate on patient experience and reduce lab fees over time

Lab-Based CAD/CAM

e.g. Dentsply Sirona inLab, Straumann CARES, Roland DWX series

Per-unit lab fees vary widely by restoration type, material, and lab — request itemised fee schedules from your lab partner.

Access to industrial-grade milling accuracy
Broader material range including high-translucency zirconia
No in-office capital investment for fabrication equipment
Technician expertise applied to complex cases

Two-appointment workflow — temporary required
Turnaround time of days to weeks depending on lab
Physical impressions or scan files must be transmitted accurately

Practices that prefer to focus clinical time on preparation and cementation, or those with lower crown volume where in-office milling ROI is harder to justify

CAD/CAM dentistry, short for computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing, is the use of digital scanning, design software, and automated fabrication equipment to produce dental restorations. It’s now a mainstream workflow in both chairside practice and the dental laboratory. Understanding how it actually works helps practice owners and lab managers make sharper investment decisions, which is the whole point of this piece.

For a broader orientation to the field, see our guide to digital dentistry and the wider Digital Dentistry topic hub.

How CAD/CAM Dentistry Works

Every CAD/CAM workflow rests on three functional stages, as described in a 2024 review published in Bioinformation:

Data capture — An intraoral scanner or desktop lab scanner captures the geometry of the prepared tooth and surrounding dentition. (For a hands-on comparison of current chairside scanners, see our best intraoral scanner guide.)
Design (CAD) — Software renders a 3D model of the proposed restoration. The clinician or technician adjusts margins, contacts, and occlusion on screen.
Fabrication (CAM) — A milling machine removes material from a pre-sintered block (subtractive manufacturing), or a printer builds the restoration layer by layer (additive manufacturing).

The technology goes back further than many practitioners realise. Digital acquisition was first attempted in the 1970s by Dr. François Duret. The first clinically practical system didn’t arrive until the 1980s, when Prof. Mörmann and Brandestini introduced the CEREC system from Sirona Dental and made it possible to fabricate direct ceramic restorations in the dental office.

Clinical Applications

According to a 2025 materials review published in PMC/MDPI, CAD/CAM can be applied across a wide range of restorations:

Inlays and onlays
Veneers
Single-unit crowns
Fixed partial dentures (bridges)
Implant abutments and implant-supported crowns
Full-mouth reconstruction

The same-day crown is the application everyone talks about. The clinician preps the tooth, scans intraorally, designs and mills the restoration, and cements it, all in a single appointment. No temporary, no second visit. Peer-reviewed literature consistently reports improved patient satisfaction as a result.

CAD/CAM is also central to digital dentures and implant-guided workflows. For the latter, see our primer on guided implant surgery.

Materials: What Can Be Milled or Printed?

A 2025 chairside materials review (PMC/MDPI) identifies the main categories used in CAD/CAM fabrication:

Feldspathic ceramics — translucent, natural aesthetics, anterior restorations
Leucite-reinforced ceramics — improved strength over feldspathic, chairside use
Lithium disilicate — one of the most widely used glass-ceramics, thanks to a strong clinical track record and broad clinician acceptance
Zirconia — the primary driver of CAD/CAM adoption; its hardness makes it incompatible with hand-shaping, so an automated milling device is essentially mandatory
Hybrid ceramics — resin-ceramic composites, balance machinability with aesthetics
Acrylic resins — provisionals, denture bases, surgical guides

The materials landscape is moving fast. The same PMC/MDPI review cautions that the sheer number of available chairside materials makes it genuinely hard for practitioners to pick the right one, especially when you’re trying to match material properties to a patient’s specific clinical conditions.

Subtractive vs. Additive Manufacturing

Milling (Subtractive)

Milling is still the dominant production method, holding more than four-fifths of the global dental milling machine market share in 2022, according to Allied Market Research data reported by Dentistry Today. Multi-axis machines have pushed fabrication accuracy up and turnaround time down.

3D Printing (Additive)

Additive manufacturing has made real inroads for resin-based restorations. By 2023, 77% of US dental laboratories had brought 3D printing into production, per market data cited by Dental Tribune. Ceramic 3D printing, including fused deposition printed zirconia, is still emerging and not yet in routine clinical use.

Key Systems and Market Landscape

CEREC (Dentsply Sirona) has been the dominant chairside platform for over three decades. Planmeca and Glidewell’s Fastmill.io are among the systems that have moved into the in-office space with competing approaches. Step back to the broader CAD/CAM ecosystem and the major players include Danaher, Straumann, Henry Schein, 3M, and Envista Holdings.

The market is growing substantially. The global dental milling machine segment was valued at $2.1 billion in 2022 and is projected to reach $4.6 billion by 2032 at a CAGR of 8.5%, according to Allied Market Research. The growth is driven by ageing populations, expanding DSOs, and demand for faster, more predictable patient experiences.

AI Integration

Artificial intelligence is increasingly baked into CAD/CAM design software. A 2024 PeerJ review found that AI has proven beneficial across multiple CAD/CAM applications, helping software factor in aesthetics, preferred occlusal schemes, and an individual clinician’s design patterns to produce restorations that need less manual tweaking. It’s an active, fast-moving area.

Barriers to Adoption

Capital cost is still the obstacle people name first. Intraoral scanners, milling units, design software licences, and block inventories add up to a serious combined investment, and that burden falls hardest on smaller practices and independent labs. In some markets, limited or inconsistent reimbursement for digitally produced restorations holds uptake back further. If you’re a low-volume single-location GP, run the per-unit math honestly before buying a mill; outsourcing fabrication to a digital lab may simply pencil out better.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between chairside CAD/CAM and lab-based CAD/CAM?

Chairside CAD/CAM places the scanner, design software, and milling unit in the dental practice, enabling same-day restorations without sending a case to an external lab. Lab-based CAD/CAM uses the same scanning and design principles but fabrication happens in a dental laboratory, typically with industrial-grade milling equipment and a wider range of materials. Many practices use a hybrid approach: scanning chairside and outsourcing milling to a digital lab.

Which CAD/CAM materials are best suited to chairside milling?

Lithium disilicate and hybrid ceramics are the most commonly used chairside milling materials because they balance machinability, aesthetics, and clinical strength. Zirconia can be milled chairside but requires a sintering furnace and additional time. Feldspathic and leucite-reinforced ceramics are also used but are less popular in newer chairside workflows. The right choice depends on the restoration type, opposing dentition, and occlusal load — there is no single universal answer.

How accurate is CAD/CAM fabrication compared to traditional crown-and-bridge methods?

Peer-reviewed literature consistently reports that CAD/CAM restorations achieve clinically acceptable marginal fit. Multi-axis milling machines have progressively improved dimensional accuracy. However, accuracy is influenced by scanner quality, operator scanning technique, material choice, and machine calibration — meaning a poorly executed digital workflow can underperform a well-executed conventional one. Regular machine calibration and block inventory management are essential to maintaining fit quality.

Is 3D printing ready to replace milling in dental labs?

For resin-based restorations — including surgical guides, provisionals, models, and denture bases — 3D printing is already mainstream; 77% of US dental labs had incorporated it by 2023. For permanent ceramic restorations such as zirconia crowns, milling remains the reliable production standard. Ceramic additive manufacturing (e.g. fused deposition printed zirconia) is an active research area but is not yet in routine clinical use as of 2025.