Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Accuracy of definitive casts using 4 implant-level impression techniques in a scenario of multi-implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival alignment levels


Martínez-Rus, Francisco; García, Carmen; Santamaría, Andrea; Özcan, Mutlu; Pradíes, Guillermo (2013). Accuracy of definitive casts using 4 implant-level impression techniques in a scenario of multi-implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival alignment levels. Implant Dentistry, 22(3):268-276.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of various implant-level impression techniques on the accuracy of definitive casts for a multiple internal connection implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival depths.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six tapered Screw-Vent implants were placed in a reference model with different angles (0, 15, and 30 degrees) and subgingival positions (0, 1, and 3 mm). Twenty medium-consistency polyether impressions of this model were made with 4 techniques (n = 5 per group): (1) indirect technique, (2) unsplinted direct technique, (3) acrylic resin-splinted direct technique, and (4) metal-splinted direct technique. Impressions were poured with type IV dental stone. The interimplant distances were measured for casts using a coordinate measuring machine and the deviations compared with the reference model were calculated. Data were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient, ANOVA and Bonferroni test (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Four impression procedures showed significant differences (P = 0.0001). Only group 4 casts showed no significant differences in comparison with the reference model (P = 0.666) (ANOVA repeated measures).
CONCLUSIONS: The impression procedure affected the accuracy of definitive casts. The metal-splinted direct technique produced the most accurate casts, followed by acrylic resin-splinted direct, indirect, and unsplinted direct techniques.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of various implant-level impression techniques on the accuracy of definitive casts for a multiple internal connection implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival depths.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six tapered Screw-Vent implants were placed in a reference model with different angles (0, 15, and 30 degrees) and subgingival positions (0, 1, and 3 mm). Twenty medium-consistency polyether impressions of this model were made with 4 techniques (n = 5 per group): (1) indirect technique, (2) unsplinted direct technique, (3) acrylic resin-splinted direct technique, and (4) metal-splinted direct technique. Impressions were poured with type IV dental stone. The interimplant distances were measured for casts using a coordinate measuring machine and the deviations compared with the reference model were calculated. Data were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient, ANOVA and Bonferroni test (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: Four impression procedures showed significant differences (P = 0.0001). Only group 4 casts showed no significant differences in comparison with the reference model (P = 0.666) (ANOVA repeated measures).
CONCLUSIONS: The impression procedure affected the accuracy of definitive casts. The metal-splinted direct technique produced the most accurate casts, followed by acrylic resin-splinted direct, indirect, and unsplinted direct techniques.

Statistics

Citations

6 citations in Web of Science®
5 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

182 downloads since deposited on 05 Feb 2014
44 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2013
Deposited On:05 Feb 2014 09:49
Last Modified:07 Dec 2017 08:35
Publisher:Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
ISSN:1056-6163
Additional Information:The accepted version is a non-final version of an article published in final form in Implant Dentistry: June 2013 - Volume 22 - Issue 3 - p 268-276
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3182920dc5
PubMed ID:23615660

Download