Electromagnetic tracker feasibility in the design of a dental superstructure for edentulous patients

The success of the osseointegration concept and the Brånemark protocol is highly associated to the accuracy in the production of an implant-supported prosthesis. One of most critical steps for long-term success of these prosthesis is the accuracy obtained during the impression procedure, which is affected by factors such as the impression material, implant position, angulation and depth. This paper investigates the feasibility of 3D electromagnetic motion tracking systems as an acquisition method for modeling full-arch implant-supported prosthesis. To this extent, we propose an implant acquisition method at the patient mouth and a calibration procedure, based on a 3D electromagnetic tracker that obtains combined measurements of implant’s position and angulation, eliminating the use of any impression material. Three calibration algorithms (namely linear interpolation, higher-order polynomial and Hardy multiquadric) were tested to compensate for the electromagnetic tracker distortions introduced by the presence of nearby metals. Moreover, implants from different suppliers were also tested to study its impact on tracking accuracy. The calibration methodology and the algorithms employed proved to implement a suitable strategy for the evaluation of novel dental impression techniques. However, in the particular case of the evaluated electromagnetic tracking system, the order of magnitude of the obtained errors invalidates its use for the full-arch modeling of implant-supported prosthesis.

Accuracy Comparison of Implant Impression Techniques: A Systematic Review

Background: Several studies link the seamless fit of implant-supported prosthesis with the accuracy of the dental impression technique obtained during acquisition. In addition, factors such as implant angulation and coping shape contribute to implant misfit. Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify the most accurate impression technique and factors affecting the impression accuracy. Material and Methods: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature was conducted analyzing articles published between 2009 and 2013. The following search terms were used: implant impression, impression accuracy, and implant misfit.A total of 417 articles were identified; 32 were selected for review. Results: All 32 selected studies refer to in vitro studies. Fourteen articles compare open and closed impression technique, 8 advocate the open technique, and 6 report similar results. Other 14 articles evaluate splinted and non-splinted techniques; all advocating the splinted technique. Polyether material usage was reported in nine; six studies tested vinyl polysiloxane and one study used irreversible hydrocolloid. Eight studies evaluated different copings designs. Intraoral optical devices were compared in four studies. Conclusions: The most accurate results were achieved with two configurations: (1) the optical intraoral system with powder and (2) the open technique with splinted squared transfer copings, using polyether as impression material.