STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The inaccuracy in transferring the position of the hexagonal head of a single implant to the working cast can result in a final single tooth crown, which clinically may present occlusal and/or interproximal contacts that are different from those contacts on the master cast obtained by the technician. PURPOSE: This in vitro study evaluated the accuracy of the master casts obtained using square pick-up impression copings for single-tooth replacement. Copings used were (1) copings as sold by the manufacturer, and (2) copings modified by sandblasting and coating with impression adhesive their roughened surfaces before final impression procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A polymeric resin model with a standard single implant was used to simulate a clinical situation. A group of 20 impressions were made using nonmodified impression copings; a second group of 20 impressions were fabricated with modified copings. Master casts fabricated for both groups were analyzed to detect rotational position change of the hexagon on the implant replicas in the master casts in reference to the resin model. RESULTS: The rotational position changes of the hexagon on implant replicas were significantly less variable in the master casts obtained with the modified impression copings than in the master casts achieved with the nonprepared copings. CONCLUSION: Improved precision of the impression was achieved when the adhesive-coated copings were used.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The inaccuracy in transferring the position of the hexagonal head of a single implant to the working cast can result in a final single tooth crown, which clinically may present occlusal and/or interproximal contacts that are different from those contacts on the master cast obtained by the technician. PURPOSE: This in vitro study evaluated the accuracy of the master casts obtained using square pick-up impression copings for single-tooth replacement. Copings used were (1) copings as sold by the manufacturer, and (2) copings modified by sandblasting and coating with impression adhesive their roughened surfaces before final impression procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A polymeric resin model with a standard single implant was used to simulate a clinical situation. A group of 20 impressions were made using nonmodified impression copings; a second group of 20 impressions were fabricated with modified copings. Master casts fabricated for both groups were analyzed to detect rotational position change of the hexagon on the implant replicas in the master casts in reference to the resin model. RESULTS: The rotational position changes of the hexagon on implant replicas were significantly less variable in the master casts obtained with the modified impression copings than in the master casts achieved with the nonprepared copings. CONCLUSION: Improved precision of the impression was achieved when the adhesive-coated copings were used.