Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 130
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 431-437

Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants


Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Azizollah Moraditalab
Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Vakilabad Blvd, Mashhad
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.166190

Rights and Permissions

Background: Accurate impression making is an essential prerequisite for achieving a passive fit between the implant and the superstructure. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of open-tray and three closed-tray impression techniques. Materials and Methods: Three acrylic resin mandibular master models with four parallel implants were used: Biohorizons (BIO), Straumann tissue-level (STL), and Straumann bone-level (SBL). Forty-two putty/wash polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the models were made using open-tray and closed-tray techniques. Closed-tray impressions were made using snap-on (STL model), transfer coping (TC) (BIO model) and TC plus plastic cap (TC-Cap) (SBL model). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the positional accuracy of the implant analog heads in each dimension (x, y and z axes), and the linear displacement (ΔR) were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (α = 0.05). Results: The ΔR values of the snap-on technique were significantly lower than those of TC and TC-Cap techniques (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between closed and open impression techniques for STL in Δx, Δy, Δz and ΔR values (P = 0.444, P = 0.181, P = 0.835 and P = 0.911, respectively). Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, the snap-on implant-level impression technique resulted in more three-dimensional accuracy than TC and TC-Cap, but it was similar to the open-tray technique.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2846    
    Printed62    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded423    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal