Cargando…

Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Obtaining accurate models and well-fitting prostheses during the fabrication of complete implant-supported prostheses has been a significant challenge. Conventional impression methods involve multiple clinical and laboratory steps that can lead to distortions, potentially resulting in inaccurate pro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vieira, Samanta N. V., Lourenço, Matheus F., Pereira, Rodrigo C., França, Esdras C., Vilaça, Ênio L., Silveira, Rodrigo R., Silva, Guilherme C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10254348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37297310
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16114176
_version_ 1785056621038141440
author Vieira, Samanta N. V.
Lourenço, Matheus F.
Pereira, Rodrigo C.
França, Esdras C.
Vilaça, Ênio L.
Silveira, Rodrigo R.
Silva, Guilherme C.
author_facet Vieira, Samanta N. V.
Lourenço, Matheus F.
Pereira, Rodrigo C.
França, Esdras C.
Vilaça, Ênio L.
Silveira, Rodrigo R.
Silva, Guilherme C.
author_sort Vieira, Samanta N. V.
collection PubMed
description Obtaining accurate models and well-fitting prostheses during the fabrication of complete implant-supported prostheses has been a significant challenge. Conventional impression methods involve multiple clinical and laboratory steps that can lead to distortions, potentially resulting in inaccurate prostheses. In contrast, digital impressions may eliminate some of these steps, leading to better-fitting prostheses. Therefore, it is important to compare conventional and digital impressions for producing implant-supported prostheses. This study aimed to compare the quality of digital intraoral and conventional impressions by measuring the vertical misfit of implant-supported complete bars obtained using both types of techniques. Five digital impressions using an intraoral scanner and five impressions using elastomer were made in a four-implant master model. The plaster models produced with conventional impressions were scanned in a laboratory scanner to obtain virtual models. Screw-retained bars (n = five) were designed on the models and milled in zirconia. The bars fabricated using digital (DI) and conventional (CI) impressions were screwed to the master model, initially with one screw (DI1 and CI1) and later with four screws (DI4 and CI4), and were analyzed under a SEM to measure the misfit. ANOVA was used to compare the results (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the misfit between the bars fabricated using digital and conventional impressions when screwed with one (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. CI1 = 101.90 µm: F = 0.096; p = 0.761) or four screws (DI4 = 59.43 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 2.655; p = 0.139). Further, there were no differences when the bars were compared within the same group screwed with one or four screws (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. DI4 = 59.43 µm: F = 2.926; p = 0.123; CI1 = 101.90 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 0.013; p = 0.907). It was concluded that both impression techniques produced bars with a satisfactory fit, regardless of whether they were screwed with one or four screws.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10254348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102543482023-06-10 Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study Vieira, Samanta N. V. Lourenço, Matheus F. Pereira, Rodrigo C. França, Esdras C. Vilaça, Ênio L. Silveira, Rodrigo R. Silva, Guilherme C. Materials (Basel) Article Obtaining accurate models and well-fitting prostheses during the fabrication of complete implant-supported prostheses has been a significant challenge. Conventional impression methods involve multiple clinical and laboratory steps that can lead to distortions, potentially resulting in inaccurate prostheses. In contrast, digital impressions may eliminate some of these steps, leading to better-fitting prostheses. Therefore, it is important to compare conventional and digital impressions for producing implant-supported prostheses. This study aimed to compare the quality of digital intraoral and conventional impressions by measuring the vertical misfit of implant-supported complete bars obtained using both types of techniques. Five digital impressions using an intraoral scanner and five impressions using elastomer were made in a four-implant master model. The plaster models produced with conventional impressions were scanned in a laboratory scanner to obtain virtual models. Screw-retained bars (n = five) were designed on the models and milled in zirconia. The bars fabricated using digital (DI) and conventional (CI) impressions were screwed to the master model, initially with one screw (DI1 and CI1) and later with four screws (DI4 and CI4), and were analyzed under a SEM to measure the misfit. ANOVA was used to compare the results (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the misfit between the bars fabricated using digital and conventional impressions when screwed with one (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. CI1 = 101.90 µm: F = 0.096; p = 0.761) or four screws (DI4 = 59.43 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 2.655; p = 0.139). Further, there were no differences when the bars were compared within the same group screwed with one or four screws (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. DI4 = 59.43 µm: F = 2.926; p = 0.123; CI1 = 101.90 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 0.013; p = 0.907). It was concluded that both impression techniques produced bars with a satisfactory fit, regardless of whether they were screwed with one or four screws. MDPI 2023-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10254348/ /pubmed/37297310 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16114176 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Vieira, Samanta N. V.
Lourenço, Matheus F.
Pereira, Rodrigo C.
França, Esdras C.
Vilaça, Ênio L.
Silveira, Rodrigo R.
Silva, Guilherme C.
Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title_full Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title_fullStr Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title_full_unstemmed Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title_short Conventional and Digital Impressions for Fabrication of Complete Implant-Supported Bars: A Comparative In Vitro Study
title_sort conventional and digital impressions for fabrication of complete implant-supported bars: a comparative in vitro study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10254348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37297310
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16114176
work_keys_str_mv AT vieirasamantanv conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT lourencomatheusf conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT pereirarodrigoc conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT francaesdrasc conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT vilacaeniol conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT silveirarodrigor conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy
AT silvaguilhermec conventionalanddigitalimpressionsforfabricationofcompleteimplantsupportedbarsacomparativeinvitrostudy