Literature DB >> 18922257

The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review.

Heeje Lee1, Joseph S So, J L Hochstedler, Carlo Ercoli.   

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Various implant impression techniques, such as the splint, pick-up, and transfer techniques, have been introduced, and some techniques may be more accurate than others. Also, clinically, some factors, including the angulation or depth of implants, may affect the accuracy of the implant impressions.
PURPOSE: The purposes of this review were to: (1) investigate the accuracy of published implant impression techniques, and (2) examine the clinical factors affecting implant impression accuracy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was performed in June 2008 of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases with the key words implant, implants, impression, and impressions. To be included, the study had to investigate the accuracy of implant impressions and be published in an English peer-reviewed journal. In addition, a hand search was performed to enrich the results for the time period from January 1980 to May 2008. After executing the search strategies, 41 articles were selected to be included in the review process.
RESULTS: All of the selected articles were in vitro studies. Of the 17 studies that compared the accuracy between the splint and nonsplint techniques, 7 advocated the splint technique, 3 advocated the nonsplint technique, and 7 reported no difference. Fourteen studies compared the accuracy of pick-up and transfer impression techniques, and 5 showed more accurate impression with the pick-up techniques, 2 with the transfer technique, and 7 showed no difference. The number of implants affected the comparison of the pick-up and splint techniques. Eleven studies compared the accuracy of polyether and vinyl polysiloxane (VPS), and 10 of 11 reported no difference between the 2 materials. Four studies examined the effect of implant angulation on the accuracy of impressions. Two studies reported higher accuracy with straight implants, while the other 2 reported there was no angulation effect.
CONCLUSIONS: The review of abutment level or implant level internal connection implants indicated that more studies reported greater accuracy with the splint technique than with the nonsplint technique. For situations in which there were 3 or fewer implants, most studies showed no difference between the pick-up and transfer techniques, whereas for 4 or more implants, more studies showed higher accuracy with the pick-up technique. Polyether and VPS were the recommended materials for the implant impressions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18922257     DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60208-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  42 in total

1.  Evaluation of impression accuracy for a four-implant mandibular model--a digital approach.

Authors:  Michael Stimmelmayr; Kurt Erdelt; Jan-Frederik Güth; Arndt Happe; Florian Beuer
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Full-arch maxillary rehabilitation fixed on 6 implants.

Authors:  M Gargari; V Prete; A Pujia; F M Ceruso
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2013-07-15

3.  Digital evaluation of the reproducibility of implant scanbody fit--an in vitro study.

Authors:  Michael Stimmelmayr; Jan-Frederik Güth; Kurt Erdelt; Daniel Edelhoff; Florian Beuer
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-06-04       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 4.  Passive Fit in Screw Retained Multi-unit Implant Prosthesis Understanding and Achieving: A Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Muaiyed Mahmoud Buzayan; Norsiah Binti Yunus
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2013-12-28

5.  Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure.

Authors:  Maria Menini; Paolo Setti; Francesco Pera; Paolo Pera; Paolo Pesce
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-09-30       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  A Comparative Analysis of Master Casts Obtained using Different Surface Treatments on Impression Copings for Single Tooth Implant Replacement -An In vitro Study.

Authors:  Surbhi Abrol; Archana Nagpal; Rupandeep Kaur; Ramit Verma; Vishal Katna; Parikshit Gupt
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-08-01

7.  Marginal fit of 3-unit CAD-CAM zirconia frameworks fabricated using cone beam computed tomography scans: an experimental study.

Authors:  Hüseyin Berkay Belgin; Ediz Kale; Tuncer Burak Özçelik; Burak Yilmaz
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 2.634

8.  Clinical study evaluating the discrepancy of two different impression techniques of four implants in an edentulous jaw.

Authors:  Michael Stimmelmayr; Jan-Frederik Güth; Kurt Erdelt; Arndt Happe; Markus Schlee; Florian Beuer
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-12-06       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Comparison of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques using 3-dimensional superimposition.

Authors:  Ye-Kyu Rhee; Yoon-Hyuk Huh; Lee-Ra Cho; Chan-Jin Park
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 1.904

10.  A technique for in vitro fit assessment of multi-unit screw-retained implant restorations: Application of a triple-scan protocol.

Authors:  Stefan Holst; Matthias Karl; Manfred Wichmann; Ragai E Matta
Journal:  J Dent Biomech       Date:  2012-07-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.