Literature DB >> 20657873

Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis.

Marcelo Antonialli Del'Acqua1, Alejandro Muñoz Chávez, Angela Líbia Chagas Amaral, Marco Antonio Compagnoni, Francisco de Assis Mollo.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate, in vitro, the dimensional accuracy of two impression techniques (squared impression copings and squared impression copings sandblasted and coated with impression adhesive) made of vinyl polysiloxane and polyether impression materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A master cast (control group) with four parallel implant abutment analogs, a passive framework, and a custom aluminum tray was fabricated. Four groups (n = 5 each group) were tested: squared Impregum (SI), squared Express (SE), sandblasted adhesive squared Impregum (ASI), and sandblasted adhesive squared Express (ASE). The measurement method employed was just one titanium screw tightened to the framework. A stereomicroscope was used to evaluate the fit of the framework by measuring the size of the gap between the abutment and the framework. The results were analyzed statistically.
RESULTS: The mean values for the abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast, 31.63 µm (SD 2.16); SI, 38.03 µm (SD 9.29); ASI, 46.80 µm (SD 8.47); SE, 151.21 µm (SD 22.79); and ASE, 136.59 µm (SD 29.80). No significant difference was detected between the SI or ASI techniques and the master cast. No significant difference was detected between the SE and ASE techniques.
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that Impregum Soft medium consistency was the best impression material and the impression technique did not influence the accuracy of the stone casts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20657873

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


  5 in total

1.  In Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of Impression Trays and Impression Materials on the Accuracy of Open Tray Implant Impressions: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Sonam Gupta; Aparna Ichalangod Narayan; Dhanasekar Balakrishnan
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2017-02-27

2.  Accuracy of Implant Position Transfer and Surface Detail Reproduction with Different Impression Materials and Techniques.

Authors:  Marzieh Alikhasi; Hakimeh Siadat; Elaheh Beyabanaki; Mohammad Javad Kharazifard
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2015-10

3.  Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants.

Authors:  Mohammadreza Nakhaei; Azam S Madani; Azizollah Moraditalab; Hamidreza Rajati Haghi
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct

4.  Cast accuracy obtained from different impression techniques at different implant angulations (in vitro study).

Authors:  Enas A Elshenawy; Ahmed M Alam-Eldein; Fadel A Abd Elfatah
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2018-03-20

5.  The Accuracy of Open-Tray vs. Snap on Impression Techniques in A 6-Implant Model: An In Vitro 3D Study.

Authors:  Adi Arieli; Maram Adawi; Mahmoud Masri; Evgeny Weinberg; Ilan Beitlitum; Raphael Pilo; Shifra Levartovsky
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 3.623

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.