Cargando…
A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy
BACKGROUND: An accurate impression is crucial to the long-term success of dental implants. This investigation evaluated the accuracy of the open and closed implant impression techniques in partially edentulous patients who received two adjacent implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients received...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6861406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31741100 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0190-6 |
_version_ | 1783471349784641536 |
---|---|
author | Osman, Motaz Ziada, Hassan Suliman, Ahmed Abubakr, Neamat Hassan |
author_facet | Osman, Motaz Ziada, Hassan Suliman, Ahmed Abubakr, Neamat Hassan |
author_sort | Osman, Motaz |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: An accurate impression is crucial to the long-term success of dental implants. This investigation evaluated the accuracy of the open and closed implant impression techniques in partially edentulous patients who received two adjacent implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients received Osstem Implants (Osstem Implant System, Seoul, Korea). Two impressions were made for each patient, one using an open tray and a second with a closed tray technique. The horizontal distances between two impression copings were measured and compared to similar measurements on the master casts. Also, under a stereomicroscope (AmScop14370, Myford Road, #150, Irvine, CA 92606 USA) at a 50-fold magnification, the presence or absence of the marginal discrepancies was evaluated. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences regarding horizontal measurements and in the marginal relationship for the two impression techniques, except between the anterior and posterior regions, for the closed tray technique. There were also no statistically significant differences in the impression accuracy between maxillary and the mandibular arches. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences for the intraoral horizontal distances, compared to similar horizontal measurements on master casts, between the open and closed tray techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present study, there were generally no differences in the impression accuracy between the open and closed tray techniques in partially edentulous patients with two adjacent implants. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6861406 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68614062019-12-05 A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy Osman, Motaz Ziada, Hassan Suliman, Ahmed Abubakr, Neamat Hassan Int J Implant Dent Research BACKGROUND: An accurate impression is crucial to the long-term success of dental implants. This investigation evaluated the accuracy of the open and closed implant impression techniques in partially edentulous patients who received two adjacent implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients received Osstem Implants (Osstem Implant System, Seoul, Korea). Two impressions were made for each patient, one using an open tray and a second with a closed tray technique. The horizontal distances between two impression copings were measured and compared to similar measurements on the master casts. Also, under a stereomicroscope (AmScop14370, Myford Road, #150, Irvine, CA 92606 USA) at a 50-fold magnification, the presence or absence of the marginal discrepancies was evaluated. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences regarding horizontal measurements and in the marginal relationship for the two impression techniques, except between the anterior and posterior regions, for the closed tray technique. There were also no statistically significant differences in the impression accuracy between maxillary and the mandibular arches. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences for the intraoral horizontal distances, compared to similar horizontal measurements on master casts, between the open and closed tray techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present study, there were generally no differences in the impression accuracy between the open and closed tray techniques in partially edentulous patients with two adjacent implants. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6861406/ /pubmed/31741100 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0190-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Osman, Motaz Ziada, Hassan Suliman, Ahmed Abubakr, Neamat Hassan A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title | A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title_full | A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title_fullStr | A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title_full_unstemmed | A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title_short | A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
title_sort | prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6861406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31741100 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0190-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT osmanmotaz aprospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT ziadahassan aprospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT sulimanahmed aprospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT abubakrneamathassan aprospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT osmanmotaz prospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT ziadahassan prospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT sulimanahmed prospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy AT abubakrneamathassan prospectiveclinicalstudyonimplantimpressionaccuracy |