Literature DB >> 24392494

Multi-unit implant impression accuracy: A review of the literature.

Mirza Rustum Baig.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accurate implant impressions are critical for the achievement of passive fit of an implant prosthesis which in turn contributes to the long-term success of the implant treatment. There is inconclusive evidence on the techniques and materials used for making multi-unit implant impressions.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the scientific data related to different aspects of multi-unit implant impression accuracy and draw useful conclusions from the review for application in clinical practice. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Studies from 1990 to November 2012 were evaluated. Papers examining implant impression accuracy for two or more implants were selected for review. Case reports, technique articles, and incomplete studies were excluded. Fifty-nine studies were selected in total for evaluation, three among them clinical and the rest in vitro.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies compared PVS (polyvinyl siloxane) and PE (polyether), 11 found no differences between the two materials in terms of impression accuracy. Thirty studies analyzed the splint effect, 13 found splinting better and 13 others elicited no differences between splinting and non-splinting. Among the 25 studies examining pickup and transfer impression techniques, 12 favored pickup over transfer and 11 found no differences between the two. Twelve studies assessed implant angulation effects and found significant differences in accuracy for 20- to 25-degree angulation, and no differences for 5- to 15-degree angulation for most studies, except two.
CONCLUSION: PVS and PE were the preferred impression materials for multi-unit implant impressions. The evidence on splinting was inconclusive and the data supporting splint to non-splint were neutral. Pickup was the better performing technique than transfer, especially with increased number of implants. Implant angulation of 20 to 25 degrees negatively affected the multi-unit implant impression accuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24392494     DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a30769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quintessence Int        ISSN: 0033-6572            Impact factor:   1.677


  7 in total

1.  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

2.  Evaluation of the effect of implant angulations and impression techniques on implant cast accuracy - An in vitro study.

Authors:  Aman Arora; Viram Upadhyaya; Kirti R Parashar; Divya Malik
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun

3.  Comparison of the accuracy of different impression procedures in case of multiple and angulated implants : Accuracy of impressions in multiple and angulated implants.

Authors:  M Wafa Richi; Sevcan Kurtulmus-Yilmaz; Oguz Ozan
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.151

4.  A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant master casts fabricated from two different transfer impression techniques.

Authors:  Rupali Patil; Pankaj Kadam; Chetan Oswal; Seema Patil; Shweta Jajoo; Arati Gachake
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr

5.  The Accuracy of Four Impression-making Techniques in Angulated Implants Based on Vertical Gap.

Authors:  Abolfazl Saboury; Hamid Neshandar Asli; Zahra Dalili Kajan
Journal:  J Dent (Shiraz)       Date:  2017-12

6.  A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy.

Authors:  Motaz Osman; Hassan Ziada; Ahmed Suliman; Neamat Hassan Abubakr
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2019-11-19

7.  Accuracy of digital impressions versus conventional impressions for 2 implants: an in vitro study evaluating the effect of implant angulation.

Authors:  Jaafar Abduo; Joseph E A Palamara
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-30
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.