Clinical–Laboratory Variability in Digitally Fabricated Complete Dentures: A Critical Evidence Synthesis and Traceability Framework

**Purpose.** To evaluate how clinical records, laboratory fabrication and postprocessing contribute to variation in complete denture performance, and to define an outcome-linked framework for documentation. **Methods.** A critical narrative synthesis was developed from a curated set of 46 research, review, technique and methodological publications available through 3 November 2026. Published effect estimates were retained with their original comparators and denominators; no new pooled estimate or systematic eligibility screening was undertaken. **Findings.** The principal procedural review incorporated 39 studies, while a network meta-analysis of 43 in-vitro studies favored milled bases for trueness and surface roughness under the studied methods. In a 60-base experiment, one printed resin had the lowest absolute deviation at both measured time points, whereas milled bases displayed the least change between 24 hours and six months. A 2026 synthesis of 25 randomized trials found no clear superiority for patient-important endpoints and identified only a small, low-certainty retention difference favoring printing over milling. Scanning, design transfer, curing, bonding, inspection and follow-up represent different potential sources of variability. **Conclusions.** Manufacturing route alone is an inadequate proxy for clinical quality. A six-checkpoint traceability model is proposed to link verified records and measured process deviations with maintenance and patient-reported outcomes. The model is an analytical proposal and requires prospective evaluation.