PURPOSE: This study compared the accuracy of an abutment-framework (A-F) taken with open tray impression technique combining cementon crown abutments, a metal framework and resin cement to closed tray and resin-splinted open tray impression techniques for the 3-implant definitive casts. The effect of angulation on the accuracy of these 3 techniques was also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three definitive casts, each with 3 linearly positioned implant analogs at relative angulations 0, 30, and 40 degrees, were fabricated with passively fitted corresponding reference frameworks. Ten impressions were made and poured, using each of the 3 techniques on each of the 3 definitive casts. To record the vertical gap between reference frameworks and analogs in duplicate casts, a light microscope with image processing was used. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test. RESULTS: The open tray techniques showed significantly smaller vertical gaps compare to closed tray technique (P < .05). The closed tray and the resin-splinted open tray technique showed significantly different vertical gaps according to the angulation of implant (P < .05), but the A-F impression technique did not (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The accuracy of the A-F impression technique was superior to that of conventional techniques, and was not affected by the angulation of the implants.
PURPOSE: This study compared the accuracy of an abutment-framework (A-F) taken with open tray impression technique combining cementon crown abutments, a metal framework and resin cement to closed tray and resin-splinted open tray impression techniques for the 3-implant definitive casts. The effect of angulation on the accuracy of these 3 techniques was also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three definitive casts, each with 3 linearly positioned implant analogs at relative angulations 0, 30, and 40 degrees, were fabricated with passively fitted corresponding reference frameworks. Ten impressions were made and poured, using each of the 3 techniques on each of the 3 definitive casts. To record the vertical gap between reference frameworks and analogs in duplicate casts, a light microscope with image processing was used. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test. RESULTS: The open tray techniques showed significantly smaller vertical gaps compare to closed tray technique (P < .05). The closed tray and the resin-splinted open tray technique showed significantly different vertical gaps according to the angulation of implant (P < .05), but the A-F impression technique did not (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The accuracy of the A-F impression technique was superior to that of conventional techniques, and was not affected by the angulation of the implants.
Entities:
Keywords:
Abutment; Angulation; Implant; Metal framework; Vertical gap
Authors: Marcos M Naconecy; Eduardo R Teixeira; Rosemary S A Shinkai; Luis Carlos F Frasca; André Cervieri Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Date: 2004 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.804