Cargando…

Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants

BACKGROUND: A precise impression is mandatory to obtain passive fit in implant-supported prostheses. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three impression materials in both parallel and nonparallel implant positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental study, two partial dent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vojdani, Mahroo, Torabi, Kianoosh, Ansarifard, Elham
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4533188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26288620
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.161429
_version_ 1782385299999948800
author Vojdani, Mahroo
Torabi, Kianoosh
Ansarifard, Elham
author_facet Vojdani, Mahroo
Torabi, Kianoosh
Ansarifard, Elham
author_sort Vojdani, Mahroo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A precise impression is mandatory to obtain passive fit in implant-supported prostheses. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three impression materials in both parallel and nonparallel implant positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental study, two partial dentate maxillary acrylic models with four implant analogues in canines and lateral incisors areas were used. One model was simulating the parallel condition and the other nonparallel one, in which implants were tilted 30° bucally and 20° in either mesial or distal directions. Thirty stone casts were made from each model using polyether (Impregum), additional silicone (Monopren) and vinyl siloxanether (Identium), with open tray technique. The distortion values in three-dimensions (X, Y and Z-axis) were measured by coordinate measuring machine. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used for data analysis (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Under parallel condition, all the materials showed comparable, accurate casts (P = 0.74). In the presence of angulated implants, while Monopren showed more accurate results compared to Impregum (P = 0.01), Identium yielded almost similar results to those produced by Impregum (P = 0.27) and Monopren (P = 0.26). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, in parallel conditions, the type of impression material cannot affect the accuracy of the implant impressions; however, in nonparallel conditions, polyvinyl siloxane is shown to be a better choice, followed by vinyl siloxanether and polyether respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4533188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45331882015-08-18 Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants Vojdani, Mahroo Torabi, Kianoosh Ansarifard, Elham Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: A precise impression is mandatory to obtain passive fit in implant-supported prostheses. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three impression materials in both parallel and nonparallel implant positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experimental study, two partial dentate maxillary acrylic models with four implant analogues in canines and lateral incisors areas were used. One model was simulating the parallel condition and the other nonparallel one, in which implants were tilted 30° bucally and 20° in either mesial or distal directions. Thirty stone casts were made from each model using polyether (Impregum), additional silicone (Monopren) and vinyl siloxanether (Identium), with open tray technique. The distortion values in three-dimensions (X, Y and Z-axis) were measured by coordinate measuring machine. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used for data analysis (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Under parallel condition, all the materials showed comparable, accurate casts (P = 0.74). In the presence of angulated implants, while Monopren showed more accurate results compared to Impregum (P = 0.01), Identium yielded almost similar results to those produced by Impregum (P = 0.27) and Monopren (P = 0.26). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, in parallel conditions, the type of impression material cannot affect the accuracy of the implant impressions; however, in nonparallel conditions, polyvinyl siloxane is shown to be a better choice, followed by vinyl siloxanether and polyether respectively. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4533188/ /pubmed/26288620 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.161429 Text en Copyright: © Dental Research Journal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Vojdani, Mahroo
Torabi, Kianoosh
Ansarifard, Elham
Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title_full Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title_fullStr Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title_short Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
title_sort accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4533188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26288620
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.161429
work_keys_str_mv AT vojdanimahroo accuracyofdifferentimpressionmaterialsinparallelandnonparallelimplants
AT torabikianoosh accuracyofdifferentimpressionmaterialsinparallelandnonparallelimplants
AT ansarifardelham accuracyofdifferentimpressionmaterialsinparallelandnonparallelimplants