Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Accuracy of Impression Techniques for Dental Implants Placed in Five Different Orientations. |
| Authors: |
Hyo-Seon Kim, Jae-Hyun Lee, Su Young Lee |
| Source: |
International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants; Sep/Oct2022, Vol. 37 Issue 5, p997-1002, 6p |
| Subject Terms: |
DENTAL implants, REFERENCE values, RESEARCH evaluation, ANALYSIS of variance, BICUSPIDS, DENTAL impressions |
| Abstract: |
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impression accuracy of two implants placed in different orientations and compare the impression accuracy obtained with the dual-arch impression technique using hybrid impression copings and the conventional open-tray impression technique. Materials and Methods: Five mandibular dentiform models were prepared by placing implants in the second premolar and second molar regions in the following different orientations: parallel to each other; 15-degree mesiodistal angulation; 30-degree mesiodistal angulation; 15-degree buccolingual angulation; and 30-degree buccolingual angulation. After making 10 impressions for each model with the open-tray impression technique and dual-arch impression technique with hybrid impression copings, cast models were fabricated for each impression (n = 10). Scan bodies were mounted on the five dentiform models and the fabricated 100 cast models were scanned using a desktop scanner. The three-dimensional deviation of the scan bodies on the cast models was calculated and compared to the reference data from the dentiform models. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted (α = .05). Results: The root mean square deviation values obtained from the implants placed with 30-degree mesiodistal angulation were 93.05 ± 6.21 µm with the open-tray impression technique and 104.01 ± 8.89 µm with the dual-arch impression technique, which were the largest deviation values for both techniques (P < .001). Compared to the open-tray impression technique, the dual-arch impression technique with the hybrid impression copings showed significantly lower accuracy when the angulation between the implants was 15 degrees mesiodistally (P < .001), 30 degrees mesiodistally (P = .016), or 30 degrees buccolingually (P < .001). However, there was no significant difference between the accuracy of the two impression techniques for parallel implants (P = .74). Conclusion: When the two implants were inclined 30 degrees mesiodistally, both implant impression techniques showed the largest deviation and the dual-arch impression technique showed lower accuracy compared to the conventional open-tray impression technique. Parallel placement of implants may improve impression accuracy and enable use of the dual-arch impression technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants is the property of Quintessence Publishing Company Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Complementary Index |
