Digital evaluation of the accuracy of impression techniques and materials in angulated implants

被引:42
|
作者
Kurtulmus-Yilmaz, Sevcan [1 ]
Ozan, Oguz [1 ]
Ozcelik, Tuncer Burak [2 ]
Yagiz, Ayberk [3 ]
机构
[1] Near East Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Prosthodont, TR-10 Mersin, Turkey
[2] Baskent Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Adana, Turkey
[3] Ay Tasarim Ltd, Ankara, Turkey
关键词
Implant angulation; Splinted direct technique; Indirect technique; Vinyl polysiloxane; Polyether; Vinyl polyether silicone; IN-VITRO; SUPPORTED SUPERSTRUCTURES; 3-DIMENSIONAL ACCURACY; SURGICAL GUIDES; CONNECTION; PROSTHESES; SYSTEM; FIT; HYDROPHILICITY; SILICONE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jdent.2014.10.008
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of 2 different impression techniques and 3 different impression materials in models simulating parallel and angulated implants. Methods: Three master models simulating partial edentulous mandible with 2 implants at the sites of second premolars (parallel) and second molars with different angulations (parallel, 10 degrees or 20 degrees angulated) were fabricated. Two different impression techniques [ splinted direct (D), indirect (I)] and 3 different monophase impression materials [ polyether (PE), vinyl polysiloxane (VPS), vinyl polyether silicone (VPES)] were used for each master model and a total of 180 impressions were made (n = 10). Master model and casts were scanned by a modified laser scanner and data were transferred to VRMesh software. Master model and duplicate cast scans were digitally aligned observing the superposition of anatomic markers. Angular and coronal deviations between master and duplicated copings were calculated and data were statistically analyzed. Results: Mean angular and coronal deviations were in a range of 0.205-0.359 degrees and 22.5633.33 mu m, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed that the angulation of implant affected both coronal and angular deviations of the impression copings (P < 0.05). According to statistical analyses, for parallel implants, the accuracy of impression materials and techniques were ranging as VPS-D = PE-D > VPS-I = PE-I > VPES-D > VPES-I from most accurate to the least. For 10 degrees and 20 degrees angulated implants the most accurate material and technique was VPS-D whereas the least accurate combination was VPES-I (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Angulation, impression technique and material were found to be effective on the accuracy of implant impressions. Clinical significance: Clinicians may prefer VPS impression material and splinted direct technique for impressions of both parallel and up to 20 degrees angulated implants. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1551 / 1559
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Accuracy of Different Implant Impression Techniques: Evaluation of New Tray Design Concept
    Liu, David Yu
    Cader, Fathima Nashmie
    Abduo, Jaafar
    Palamara, Joseph
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2019, 28 (02): : E682 - E687
  • [42] Passive fit and accuracy of three dental implant impression techniques
    Al Quran, Firas A.
    Rashdan, Bashar A.
    Abu Zomar, AbdelRahman A.
    Weiner, Saul
    QUINTESSENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2012, 43 (02): : 119 - 125
  • [43] Digital assessment of properties of the three different generations of dental elastomeric impression materials
    Singer, Lamia
    Habib, Shaymaa I.
    Shalaby, Heba El-Amin
    Saniour, Sayed H.
    Bourauel, Christoph
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [44] Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes
    Yuzbasioglu, Emir
    Kurt, Hanefi
    Turunc, Rana
    Bilir, Halenur
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2014, 14
  • [45] Evaluation of the Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Implant Impression Techniques in Two Simulated Clinical Conditions by Optical Scanning
    Sabouhi, Mahmoud
    Bajoghli, Farshad
    Abolhasani, Majid
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2015, 30 (01) : 26 - 34
  • [46] Comparison of Impression Techniques and Materials for an Implant-Supported Prosthesis
    Del'Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
    Chavez, Alejandro Munoz
    Chagas Amaral, Angela Libia
    Compagnoni, Marco Antonio
    Mollo, Francisco de Assis, Jr.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2010, 25 (04) : 771 - 776
  • [47] Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy
    Marghalani, Amin
    Weber, Hans-Peter
    Finkelman, Matthew
    Kudara, Yukio
    El Rafie, Khaled
    Papaspyridakos, Panos
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2018, 119 (04): : 574 - 579
  • [48] Comparison of the Accuracy of Biomet 3i Encode Robocast Technology and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques
    Howell, Kent J.
    McGlumphy, Edwin A.
    Drago, Carl
    Knapik, Gregory
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2013, 28 (01) : 228 - 240
  • [49] Accuracy of digital planning in zygomatic implants
    B. Xing Gao
    O. Iglesias-Velázquez
    F. G.F. Tresguerres
    A. Rodríguez González Cortes
    I. F. Tresguerres
    R. Ortega Aranegui
    R. M. López-Pintor
    J. López-Quiles
    J. Torres
    International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 7
  • [50] Accuracy of digital planning in zygomatic implants
    Xing Gao, B.
    Iglesias-Velazquez, O.
    G.f. Tresguerres, F.
    Rodriguez Gonzalez Cortes, A.
    F. Tresguerres, I.
    Ortega Aranegui, R.
    Lopez-Pintor, R. M.
    Lopez-Quiles, J.
    Torres, J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2021, 7 (01)