Comparative in vitro study of the accuracy of impression techniques for dental implantsdirect technique with an elastomeric impression material versus intraoral scanner

  1. Cristina Rech Ortega 1
  2. Lucía Fernández Estevan 1
  3. María Fernanda Solá Ruiz 2
  4. Rubén Agustín Panadero 3
  5. Carlos Labaig Rueda 4
  1. 1 DDS, PhD. Associate Professor, Department of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  2. 2 DDS, PhD, MD. Adjunct Professor, Department of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  3. 3 DDS, PhD. Adjunct Professor, Department of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  4. 4 DDS, PhD, MD. Professor, Department of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
Montrer des affiliations +
Revue:
Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa

ISSN: 1698-6946

Année de publication: 2019

Volumen: 24

Número: 1

Pages: 13

Type: Article

DOI: 10.4317/MEDORAL.22822 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa

Résumé

The aim of this study was to compare a conventional technique (elastomeric impression material - EIM) and a digital technique (scanner digital model – SDM) on a six-analog master model (MM) to determine which was the most exact. Twenty impressions were taken of a master model (EIM) and twenty scanned impressions (SDM) (True Definition). A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to measure the distances between adjacent analogues (1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6), intermittently positioned analogues (1-4, 3-6) and the most distal (1-6). Reference values were established from the master model, which were compared with the two impression techniques. The significance level was established as 5% (p<0.05). The precision of each technique was compared with MM. For adjacent analogues (1-2), no significant differences were found between EIM-MM (p=0,146). For intermittently positioned analogues (1-4), SDM did not show significant differences with MM (p=0.255). For the distance between distal analogues (1-6), significant differences were found between both techniques and MM (p=0.001). In a clinical situation with < three implants, EIM is more exact than SDM, but in cases of four implants SDM is more exact. For rehabilitations (> four implants), neither technique can be considered accurate although error falls within the tolerance limits established in the literature (30-150µm).

Références bibliographiques

  • Lee, H,Ercoli, C,Funkenbusch, PD,Feng, . (2008). Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 99. 107
  • Lee, H,So, J,Hochstedler, JL,Ercoli, . (2008). The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 100. 285
  • De Vasconcellos, D,Noriyuki, A,Melo, A,Bottino, MA,Özcan, . (2014). A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks. J Prosthet Dent. 112. 834
  • Grosmann, Y,Pasciuta, M,Finger, I. (2006). A novel technique using a coded healing abutment for the fabrication of a CAD/CAM titanium abutment for an implant-supported restoration. J Prosthet Dent. 95. 258
  • Güth, JF,Keul, C,Stimmelmayr, M,Beuer, F,Edelhoff, . (2013). Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Invest. 7. 1201
  • Nedelcu, RG,Persson, AS. (2014). Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 112. 1461
  • Patzelt, SMB,Emmanouilidi, . (2014). Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Invest. 18. 1687
  • Ting-shu, S,Jian, . (2015). Intraoral digital impression technique: a review. J Prosthodont. 24. 313
  • Giménez, B,Özcan, M,Martínez-Rus, F,Pradíes, . (2014). Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Parallel Confocal Laser Technology for Implants with Consideration of Operator Experience and Implant Angulation and Depth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 29. 853
  • Abduo, J,Lyons, . (2013). Rationale for the use of CAD/CAM technology in implant prosthodontics. J Dent. 1-8
  • Nayyar, N,Yilmaz, B,McGlumphy, . (2013). Using digitally coded healing abutments and an intraoral scanner to fabricate implant-supported, cement-retained restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 109. 210
  • Giménez, B,Özcan, M,Martínez-Rus, F,Pradíes, . (2015). Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Active Wavefront Sampling Technology for Implants Considering Operator Experience, Implant Angulation, and Depth. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 17. 54-64
  • Giménez, B,Pradíes, G,Martínez-Rus, F,Özcan, . (2015). Accuracy of two Digital Implant Impression Systems Confocal Microscopy with variations in customized software and clinical parameters. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 30. 56-64
  • Kuhr, F,Schmidt, A,Rehmann, P,Wöstmann, . (2016). A new method for assesing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients. J Dent. 55. 68-74
  • Lee, SJ,Cho, S. (2011). Accuracy of five implant impression technique: effect of splinting materials and methods. J Adv Prosthodont. 3. 177
  • Bergin, JM,Rubenstein, JE,Mancl, L,Brudvik, JS,Raigrodski, A. (2013). An in vitro comparison of photogrammetric and conventional complete-arch implant impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 110. 243
  • Martínez-Rus, F,García, C,Santamaría, A,Özcan, M,Pradíes, . (2013). Accuracy of definitive casts using 4 implant-level impression techniques in a scenario of multi-implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival alignment levels. Implant Dent. 22. 268
  • Assunçao, WG,Filho, HG,Zaniquelli, . (2004). Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations. Implant Dent. 13. 358
  • Cabral, LM,Guedes, C. (2007). Comparative analysis of 4 impression techniques for implants. Implant Dent. 16. 187
  • Herbst, D,Nel, JC,Driessen, CH,Becker, P. (2000). Evaluation of impression accuracy for osseointegrated implant supported superstructures. J Prosthet Dent. 83. 555
  • Wee, A. (2000). Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impression. J Prosthet Dent. 83. 323
  • Assunçao, WG,Tabata, LF,Cardoso, A,Rocha, EP,Gomes, E. (2008). Prosthetic transfer impression accuracy evaluation for osseointegrated implants. Implant Dent. 17. 248
  • Assunçao, WG,Britto, RC,Ricardo Barao, VA,Delben, JA,dos Santos, P. (2010). Evaluation of impression accuracy for implant at various angulations. Implant Dent. 19. 167
  • Rutkunas, V,Ignatovic, . (2014). A technique to splint and verify the accuracy of implant impression copings with light-polymerizing acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent. 111. 254
  • Del'Acqua, MA,Arioli-Filho, JN,Compagnoni, MA,Jr Mollo, F. (2008). Accuracy of impression and pouring techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 23. 226
  • Papaspyridakos, P,Galluci, GO,Chen, CJ,Hanssen, S,Naert, I,Vandenberghe, . (2016). Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 27. 465
  • Ender, A,Mehl, . (2013). Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 109. 121
  • Contreras, EF,Henriques, GE,Giolo, SR,Nobilo, M. (2002). Fit of cast commercially pure titanium and Ti- GAL-4V alloy crowns before and after marginal refinement by electrical discharge machining. J Prosthet Dent. 88. 467
  • Jemt, . (1991). Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prosthesis by Brånemark implants in edentulous jaws: A study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual check-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 6. 270
  • Heckmann, SM,Karl, M,Wichmann, MG,Winter, W,Graef, F,Taylor, T. (2004). Cement fixation and screw retention: parameters of passive fit. An in vitro study of three-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 15. 466
  • Katsoulis, J,Mericske-Stern, R,Rotkina, L,Zbären, C,Enkling, N,Blatz, M. (2014). Precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained 10-unit computer-aided-designed and computer- aided-manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 25. 165
La source de données: Dialnet