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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Osman, Motaz, Ziada, Hassan, Suliman, Ahmed, Abubakr, Neamat Hassan
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