Evaluation of Impression Accuracy for Implant at Various Angulations

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Prosthetic transfer impression accuracy evaluation for osseointegrated implants

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare 3 impression techniques for osseointegrated implant transfer procedures.Materials and Methods: (1) Group Splinted with Acrylic Resin (SAR), impression with square copings splinted with prefabricated autopolymerizing acrylic resin bar; (2) Group Splinted with Light-Curing Resin (SLR), impression, with square copings splinted with prefabricated light-curing composite resin bar; (3). Group Independent Air-abraded (IAA), impression with independent square coping aluminum oxide air-abraded. Impression procedures were performed with polyether material, and the data obtained was compared with a control group. These were characterized by metal matrix (MM) measurement values of the implants inclination positions at 90 and 05 degrees in relation to the matrix surface. Readings of analogs and implant inclinations were assessed randomly through graphic computation AutoCAD software. Experimental groups angular deviation with MM were submitted to analysis of variance and means were compared through Tukey's test (P < 0.05).Results: There was no statistical significant difference between SAR and SLR experimental groups and MM for vertical and angulated implants. Group IAA presented a statistically significant difference for angulated implants.Conclusion: It was concluded within the limitations of this study, that SAR and SLR produced more accurate casts than IAA technique, which presented inferior results.

In Vitro Implant Impression Accuracy Using a New Photopolymerizing SDR Splinting Material

PURPOSE The study aims to evaluate three-dimensionally (3D) the accuracy of implant impressions using a new resin splinting material, "Smart Dentin Replacement" (SDR). MATERIALS AND METHODS A titanium model of an edentulous mandible with six implant analogues was used as a master model and its dimensions measured with a coordinate measuring machine. Before the total 60 impressions were taken (open tray, screw-retained abutments, vinyl polysiloxane), they were divided in four groups: A (test): copings pick-up splinted with dental floss and fotopolymerizing SDR; B (test): see A, additionally sectioned and splinted again with SDR; C (control): copings pick-up splinted with dental floss and autopolymerizing Duralay® (Reliance Dental Mfg. Co., Alsip, IL, USA) acrylic resin; and D (control): see C, additionally sectioned and splinted again with Duralay. The impressions were measured directly with an optomechanical coordinate measuring machine and analyzed with a computer-aided design (CAD) geometric modeling software. The Wilcoxon matched-pair signed-rank test was used to compare groups. RESULTS While there was no difference (p = .430) between the mean 3D deviations of the test groups A (17.5 μm) and B (17.4 μm), they both showed statistically significant differences (p < .003) compared with both control groups (C 25.0 μm, D 19.1 μm). CONCLUSIONS Conventional impression techniques for edentulous jaws with multiple implants are highly accurate using the new fotopolymerizing splinting material SDR. Sectioning and rejoining of the SDR splinting had no impact on the impression accuracy.

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.

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 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 was 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 9; 6 studies tested vinyl polysiloane and 1 study used irreversible hydrocolloid. Eight studies evaluated different copings designs. Intra-oral optical devices were compared in 4 studies. Conclusions The most accurate results were achieved with two configurations: (1) the optical intra-oral system with powder; and (2) the open technique with splinted squared transfer copings, using polyether as impression material.

Comparison of the Accuracy of Plastic and Metal Stock Trays for Implant Impressions

Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated the dimensional accuracy of two impression techniques (tapered and splinted) with two stock trays (plastic and metal) for implant-supported prostheses. Materials and Methods: A master cast with four parallel abutment analogs and a passive framework were fabricated. Polyvinyl siloxane impression material was used for all impressions with two metal stock trays and two plastic stock trays (closed and open trays). Four groups (tapered plastic, splinted plastic, tapered metal, and splinted metal) and a control group (master cast) were tested (n = 5 for each group). After the framework was seated on each of the casts, one abutment screw was tightened, and the marginal gap between the abutment and framework on the other side was measured with a stereomicroscope. The measurements were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance on ranks test followed by the Dunn method. Results: The mean values (+/- standard deviations) for the abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast, 32 +/- 2 mu m; tapered metal, 44 +/- 10 mu m; splinted metal, 69 +/- 28 mu m; tapered plastic, 164 +/- 58 mu m; splinted plastic, 128 +/- 47 mu m. No significant difference was detected between the master cast, tapered metal, and splinted metal groups or between the tapered and splinted plastic groups. Conclusions: In this study, the rigidity of the metal stock tray ensured better results than the plastic stock tray for implant impressions with a high-viscosity impression material (putty). Statistically similar results were obtained using tapered impression copings and splinted squared impression copings. The tapered impression copings technique and splinted squared impression copings technique with a metal stock tray produced precise casts with no statistically significant difference in interface gaps compared to the master cast. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2012;27:544-550.

Comparison Of Different Transfer Impression Techniques Accuracy For Osseointegrated Implants.

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate three transfer techniques used to obtain working casts of implant-supported prostheses through the marginal misfit and strain induced to metallic framework. Thirty working casts were obtained from a metallic master cast, each one containing two implant analogues simulating a clinical situation of three-unit implant-supported fixed prostheses, according to the following transfer impression techniques: Group A, squared transfers splinted with dental floss and acrylic resin, sectioned and re-splinted; Group B, squared transfers splinted with dental floss and bis-acrylic resin; and Group N, squared transfers not splinted. A metallic framework was made for marginal misfit and strain measurements from the metallic master cast. The misfit between metallic framework and the working casts was evaluated with an optical microscope following the single-screw test protocol. In the same conditions, the strain was evaluated using strain gauges placed on the metallic framework. The data was submitted to one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey's test (α=5%). For both marginal misfit and strain, there were statistically significant differences between Groups A and N (p<0.01) and Groups B and N (p<0.01), with greater values for the Group N. According to the Pearson's test, there was a positive correlation between the variables misfit and strain (r=0.5642). The results of this study showed that the impression techniques with splinted transfers promoted better accuracy than non-splinted one, regardless of the splinting material utilized.

Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials

Several impression materials are available in the Brazilian marketplace to be used in oral rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of different impression materials used for fixed partial dentures following the manufacturers' instructions. A master model representing a partially edentulous mandibular right hemi-arch segment whose teeth were prepared to receive full crowns was used. Custom trays were prepared with auto-polymerizing acrylic resin and impressions were performed with a dental surveyor, standardizing the path of insertion and removal of the tray. Alginate and elastomeric materials were used and stone casts were obtained after the impressions. For the silicones, impression techniques were also compared. To determine the impression materials' accuracy, digital photographs of the master model and of the stone casts were taken and the discrepancies between them were measured. The data were subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's complementary test. Polyether and addition silicone following the single-phase technique were statistically different from alginate, condensation silicone and addition silicone following the double-mix technique (p < .05), presenting smaller discrepancies. However, condensation silicone was similar (p > .05) to alginate and addition silicone following the double-mix technique, but different from polysulfide. The results led to the conclusion that different impression materials and techniques influenced the stone casts' accuracy in a way that polyether, polysulfide and addition silicone following the single-phase technique were more accurate than the other materials.

The accuracy and reliability of plaster vs digital study models : a comparison of three different impression materials

Introduction: Le but de l’étude était d’examiner l’effet des matériaux à empreintes sur la précision et la fiabilité des modèles d’études numériques. Méthodes: Vingt-cinq paires de modèles en plâtre ont été choisies au hasard parmi les dossiers de la clinique d’orthodontie de l’Université de Montréal. Une empreinte en alginate (Kromopan 100), une empreinte en substitut d’alginate (Alginot), et une empreinte en PVS (Aquasil) ont été prises de chaque arcade pour tous les patients. Les empreintes ont été envoyées chez Orthobyte pour la coulée des modèles en plâtre et la numérisation des modèles numériques. Les analyses de Bolton 6 et 12, leurs mesures constituantes, le surplomb vertical (overbite), le surplomb horizontal (overjet) et la longueur d’arcade ont été utilisés pour comparaisons. Résultats : La corrélation entre mesures répétées était de bonne à excellente pour les modèles en plâtre et pour les modèles numériques. La tendance voulait que les mesures répétées sur les modèles en plâtre furent plus fiables. Il existait des différences statistiquement significatives pour l’analyse de Bolton 12, pour la longueur d’arcade mandibulaire, et pour le chevauchement mandibulaire, ce pour tous les matériaux à empreintes. La tendance observée fut que les mesures sur les modèles en plâtre étaient plus petites pour l’analyse de Bolton 12 mais plus grandes pour la longueur d’arcade et pour le chevauchement mandibulaire. Malgré les différences statistiquement significatives trouvées, ces différences n’avaient aucune signification clinique. Conclusions : La précision et la fiabilité du logiciel pour l’analyse complète des modèles numériques sont cliniquement acceptables quand on les compare avec les résultats de l’analyse traditionnelle sur modèles en plâtre.

Accuracy of Impression Techniques for Impants. Part 2-Comparison of Splinting Techniques

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare splinting techniques for impression copings of osseointegrated implants with different angulations.Materials and Methods: Replicas (N = 24) of a metal matrix (control) containing two implants at 90 degrees and 65 degrees in relation to the horizontal surface were obtained by using four impression techniques: Technique 1 (T1), direct technique with square copings without union in open trays; Technique 2 (T2), square copings splinted with dental floss and autopolymerizing acrylic resin; Technique 3 (T3), square copings splinted with dental floss and autopolymerizing acrylic resin, sectioned and splinted again with autopolymerizing acrylic resin; Technique 4 (T4), square copings splinted with prefabricated acrylic resin bar. The impression material was polyether. The replicas were individually scanned to capture the images, which were assessed in a graphic computation program. The program allowed the angulation between the bases of the replicas and the reading screws to be measured. The images of the replicas were compared with the matrix image (control), and the differences in angulations from the control image were calculated. The analysis of variance and the Tukey test for comparisons (p < 0.05) were used for statistical analysis.Results: All groups showed significant differences in the implant angulations in comparison with the control group (p < 0.05). Group T1 showed the highest difference (1.019 degrees) followed by groups T2 (0.747 degrees), T3 (0.516 degrees), and T4 (0.325 degrees), which showed the lowest angular alteration compared to the control group. There were significant differences between inclined and straight implants in all the groups, except in group T4.Conclusions: Based on the results, the splinting of pick-up impression copings is indicated for osseointegrated implant impressions. The square copings splinted with a prefabricated acrylic resin bar presented the best results among the pick-up impression techniques evaluated in this study.

Accuracy of Impression Techniques for an Implant-Supported Prosthesis

Purpose: This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of a stone index and of two impression techniques (squared impression copings and modified squared impression copings) for implant-supported prostheses. Materials and Methods: A master cast with four parallel implant-abutment analogs and a passive framework were fabricated. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material was used for all impressions with a metal stock tray. Three groups of impressions were tested (n = 5): index (1), squared (S), and modified squared (MS). The measurement method employed was just one titanium screw tightened to the framework. The measurements (60 gap values) were analyzed using software that received the images from a video camera coupled to a stereomicroscope at x 100 magnification. The results were evaluated statistically (analysis of variance, Holm-Sidak method, alpha = .05). Results: The mean abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast = 31.63 mu m; group I = 45.25 mu m; group S = 96.14 mu m; group MS = 51.20 mu m. No significant difference was detected among the index and modified squared techniques (P = .05). Conclusion: Under the limitations of this study, the techniques modified squared and index generated more accurate casts than the squared technique. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2010;25:715-721

Accuracy of impression and pouring techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of a stone index and of 3 impression techniques (tapered impression copings, squared impression copings, and squared impression copings splinted with acrylic resin) associated with 3 pouring techniques (conventional, pouring using latex tubes fitted onto analogs, and pouring after joining the analogs with acrylic resin) for implant-supported prostheses. Materials and Methods: A mandibular brass cast with 4 stainless steel implant-abutment analogs, a framework, and 2 aluminum custom trays were fabricated. Polyether impression material was used for all impressions. Ten groups were formed (a control group and 9 test groups formed by combining each pouring technique and impression technique). Five casts were made per group for a total of 50 casts and 200 gap values (1 gap value for each implant-abutment analog). Results: The mean gap value with the index technique was 27.07 mu m. With the conventional pouring technique, the mean gap values were 116.97 mu m for the tapered group, 5784 mu m for the squared group, and 73.17 mu m for the squared splinted group. With pouring using latex tubes, the mean gap values were 65.69 mu m for the tapered group, 38.03 mu m for the squared group, and 82.47 mu m for the squared splinted group. With pouring after joining the analogs with acrylic resin, the mean gap values were 141.12 jum for the tapered group, 74.19 mu m for the squared group, and 104.67 mu m for the squared splinted group. No significant difference was detected among Index, squarellatex techniques, and master cast (P > .05). Conclusions: The most accurate impression technique utilized squared copings. The most accurate pouring technique for making the impression with tapered or squared copings utilized latex tubes. The pouring did not influence the accuracy of the stone casts when using splinted squared impression copings. Either the index technique or the use of squared coping combined with the latex-tube pouring technique are preferred methods for making implant-supported fixed restorations with dimensional accuracy.

Accuracy of impression techniques for implants. Part 1 - Influence of transfer copings surface abrasion

Purpose: This study evaluated the influence of surface abrasion of transfer copings to obtain a precise master cast for a partially edentulous restoration with different inclinations. Materials and Methods: Replicas (N = 30) of a metal matrix (control group) containing two implants at 90° and 65° in relation to the benchtop were obtained using a polyether impression material and three impression techniques: square impression copings splint with dental floss and autopolymerizing acrylic resin (TRS), square impression copings abraded with aluminum oxide (TA), and square impression copings abraded with aluminum oxide and adhesive-coated (TAA). The replicas obtained in type V stone were digitalized, and the images were exported to AutoCAD software to perform the readings of possible degree alterations in implant inclinations. The results were submitted to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test (α < 0.05). Results: Comparing the techniques with regard to the 90° implant inclination, no statistical difference was observed between the three techniques and the control group. Analyzing the three techniques with regard to the 65° implant inclination, no significant difference was seen between technique TA and the control group. Conclusions: Technique TA presented more accurate master casts than TRS and TAA techniques. The angulated implant (65°) tended to generate more imprecise master casts than implants perpendicular to the surface. © 2008 by The American College of Prosthodontists.

Comparison of the accuracy for three dental impression techniques and index: An in vitro study

Objectives: This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of stone index (I) and three impression techniques: tapered impression copings (T), squared impression copings (S) and modified squared impression copings (MS) for implant-supported prostheses. Methods: A master cast, with four parallel implant abutment analogs and a passive framework, were fabricated. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material was used for all impressions with two metal stock trays (open and closed tray). Four groups (I, T, S and MS) were tested (n = 5). A metallic framework was seated on each of the casts, one abutment screw was tightened, and the gap between the analog of implant and the framework was measured with a stereomicroscope. The groups' measurements (80 gap values) were analyzed using software (LeicaQWin - Leica Imaging Systems Ltd.) that received the images of a video camera coupled to a Leica stereomicroscope at 100× magnification. The results were statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis One Way ANOVA on Ranks test followed by Dunn's Method, 0.05. Results: The mean values of abutment/framework interface gaps were: Master Cast = 32 μm (SD 2); Group I = 45 μm (SD 3); Group T = 78 μm (SD 25); Group S = 134 μm (SD 30); Group MS = 143 μm (SD 27). No significant difference was detected among Index and Master Cast (P = .05). Conclusion: Under the limitations of this study, it could be suggested that a more accurate working cast is possible using tapered impression copings techniques and stone index. © 2013 Japan Prosthodontic Society.

Effect of splinting in accuracy of two implants impression techniques

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)