Literature DB >> 20556249

Assessing the fit of implant fixed prostheses: a critical review.

Jaafar Abduo1, Vincent Bennani, Neil Waddell, Karl Lyons, Michael Swain.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This review critically compares the available clinical and laboratory methods for assessing the fit of an implant prosthesis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched for studies related to the fit of implant prostheses or the effect of misfit. Different combinations of key words were used. The screening procedure was performed in two stages. In the first stage, the relevant articles were selected. In the second stage, from those articles, specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied.
RESULTS: Fifty-four articles were selected. Two different techniques were identified: in vitro and in vivo. The advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of each technique are discussed. There are clear limitations for the in vivo techniques. The in vitro techniques provide a more accurate measure of prosthesis misfit.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the variety of techniques and the different parameters assessed by each, it is useful to combine several techniques to assess the accuracy of fit, quantify the effect of misfit, and subsequently determine an acceptable level of fit.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20556249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  20 in total

1.  [Effect of materials and superstructure designs on the passive fit of implant-supported fixed prostheses].

Authors:  Shan Song; Zheng Zheng; Li-Yuan Yang; Xu Gao
Journal:  Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2019-02-01

2.  A new 3D-method to assess the inter implant dimensions in patients - A pilot study.

Authors:  Alexander Schmidt; Jan-Wilhelm Billig; Maximiliane A Schlenz; Bernd Wöstmann
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-02-01

3.  Effect of full arch two scanning techniques on the accuracy of overdenture conventional and CAD/CAM Co-Cr bars.

Authors:  Ali Alenezi; Mohammed Yehya; Mohamed Alkhodary
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2022-08-28

4.  Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology.

Authors:  Wicher J van der Meer; Frank S Andriessen; Daniel Wismeijer; Yijin Ren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Impression of multiple implants using photogrammetry: description of technique and case presentation.

Authors:  David Peñarrocha-Oltra; Rubén Agustín-Panadero; Leticia Bagán; Beatriz Giménez; María Peñarrocha
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2014-07-01

6.  Current status of implant prosthetics in Japan: a survey among certified dental lab technicians.

Authors:  Yoshiyuki Hagiwara; Tatsuya Narita; Yohei Shioda; Keisuke Iwasaki; Takayuki Ikeda; Shunsuke Namaki; Thomas J Salinas
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2015-02-17

7.  Clinical Evaluation of Complications in Implant-Supported Dentures: A 4-Year Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Sabiha Zelal Ülkü; Filiz Acun Kaya; Ersin Uysal; Belgin Gulsun
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2017-12-27

8.  Rationale for the use of CAD/CAM technology in implant prosthodontics.

Authors:  Jaafar Abduo; Karl Lyons
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2013-04-16

9.  The evolution of dental materials for hybrid prosthesis.

Authors:  Jorge Gonzalez
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2014-05-16

10.  Dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials in direct implant impression technique for multiple dental implants.

Authors:  Rohini Rajendran; N Gopi Chander; Kuttae Vishwanathan Anitha; Balasubramanian Muthukumar
Journal:  Eur Oral Res       Date:  2021-05-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.