Cargando…
Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants
BACKGROUND: Accurate impression making is an essential prerequisite for achieving a passive fit between the implant and the superstructure. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of open-tray and three closed-tray impression techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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/PMC4630706/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26604956 |
_version_ | 1782398753568718848 |
---|---|
author | Nakhaei, Mohammadreza Madani, Azam S Moraditalab, Azizollah Haghi, Hamidreza Rajati |
author_facet | Nakhaei, Mohammadreza Madani, Azam S Moraditalab, Azizollah Haghi, Hamidreza Rajati |
author_sort | Nakhaei, Mohammadreza |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Accurate impression making is an essential prerequisite for achieving a passive fit between the implant and the superstructure. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of open-tray and three closed-tray impression techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three acrylic resin mandibular master models with four parallel implants were used: Biohorizons (BIO), Straumann tissue-level (STL), and Straumann bone-level (SBL). Forty-two putty/wash polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the models were made using open-tray and closed-tray techniques. Closed-tray impressions were made using snap-on (STL model), transfer coping (TC) (BIO model) and TC plus plastic cap (TC-Cap) (SBL model). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the positional accuracy of the implant analog heads in each dimension (x, y and z axes), and the linear displacement (ΔR) were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The ΔR values of the snap-on technique were significantly lower than those of TC and TC-Cap techniques (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between closed and open impression techniques for STL in Δx, Δy, Δz and ΔR values (P = 0.444, P = 0.181, P = 0.835 and P = 0.911, respectively). CONCLUSION: Considering the limitations of this study, the snap-on implant-level impression technique resulted in more three-dimensional accuracy than TC and TC-Cap, but it was similar to the open-tray technique. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4630706 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46307062015-11-24 Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants Nakhaei, Mohammadreza Madani, Azam S Moraditalab, Azizollah Haghi, Hamidreza Rajati Dent Res J (Isfahan) Original Article BACKGROUND: Accurate impression making is an essential prerequisite for achieving a passive fit between the implant and the superstructure. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of open-tray and three closed-tray impression techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three acrylic resin mandibular master models with four parallel implants were used: Biohorizons (BIO), Straumann tissue-level (STL), and Straumann bone-level (SBL). Forty-two putty/wash polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the models were made using open-tray and closed-tray techniques. Closed-tray impressions were made using snap-on (STL model), transfer coping (TC) (BIO model) and TC plus plastic cap (TC-Cap) (SBL model). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the positional accuracy of the implant analog heads in each dimension (x, y and z axes), and the linear displacement (ΔR) were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The ΔR values of the snap-on technique were significantly lower than those of TC and TC-Cap techniques (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between closed and open impression techniques for STL in Δx, Δy, Δz and ΔR values (P = 0.444, P = 0.181, P = 0.835 and P = 0.911, respectively). CONCLUSION: Considering the limitations of this study, the snap-on implant-level impression technique resulted in more three-dimensional accuracy than TC and TC-Cap, but it was similar to the open-tray technique. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4630706/ /pubmed/26604956 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-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Nakhaei, Mohammadreza Madani, Azam S Moraditalab, Azizollah Haghi, Hamidreza Rajati Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title | Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title_full | Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title_fullStr | Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title_full_unstemmed | Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title_short | Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
title_sort | three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4630706/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26604956 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nakhaeimohammadreza threedimensionalaccuracyofdifferentimpressiontechniquesfordentalimplants AT madaniazams threedimensionalaccuracyofdifferentimpressiontechniquesfordentalimplants AT moraditalabazizollah threedimensionalaccuracyofdifferentimpressiontechniquesfordentalimplants AT haghihamidrezarajati threedimensionalaccuracyofdifferentimpressiontechniquesfordentalimplants |