Limits...
Comparison of implant cast accuracy of multiple implant impression technique with different splinting materials: An in vitro study

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Introduction:: An accurate and passive fit of implant framework prosthesis, as well as the successful surgical operation is suggested as one of the critical requirements for long-term implant success.

Objective:: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of the master cast using open tray impression technique with conventional and novel splinting materials.

Methodology:: A mandibular reference model with four ADIN implants was done. Ten custom trays were fabricated using the light curable resin sheets. Medium body polyether impression material was used. These trays were randomly divided between the two groups, with five trays in each group. Impression techniques were divided into two groups namely: Group A: Direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (GC pattern resin). Group B: Direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with Pro-temp TM 4 (bis-GMA) syringable temporization material. Thus, final impressions were made. Total of 10 master casts were fabricated. Evaluation of casts using Dynascope-Vision Engineering, TESA microhite two- dimension and coordinate measuring machine were used.

Results:: Statistical comparisons were made using ANOVA test and post-hoc test. Same amount of deviation values obtained with resin splinted and bis-GMA splinted impression copings.

Conclusion:: The master cast obtained by both the splinting material exhibits no difference from the reference model. So bis-GMA can be used, which is easy to handle, less time consuming, less technique sensitive, rigid, and readily available material in clinics.

No MeSH data available.


Magnified image of each implant in Dynascope-Vision Engineering
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837773&req=5

Figure 9: Magnified image of each implant in Dynascope-Vision Engineering

Mentions: The medium body polyether was machine mixed (3M ESPE pentamix 2 Germany) and dispensed into a penta elastomer syringe (3M ESPE, Germany). It was syringed around the impression copings to avoid impression defects around the copings and loaded in the custom tray. The tray was then carried onto the reference model immediately and the impression made. It was made sure that the tray seated completely in the three stops that were made in the reference model to ensure complete seating and proper positioning of the custom tray. The impression was allowed to set for 6 min as per the manufacturer's recommendation. The screws of the impression posts were unscrewed and the impression removed from the reference model [Figure 8]. A total of five impressions were made in each group in a similar manner. The implant replica was fastened on to the impression copings and impressions were poured using Type IV dental stone (Ultrarock, Kalabhai). A total of 10 master cast were obtained [Figure 9] and only one model was obtained from each impression.


Comparison of implant cast accuracy of multiple implant impression technique with different splinting materials: An in vitro study
Magnified image of each implant in Dynascope-Vision Engineering
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837773&req=5

Figure 9: Magnified image of each implant in Dynascope-Vision Engineering
Mentions: The medium body polyether was machine mixed (3M ESPE pentamix 2 Germany) and dispensed into a penta elastomer syringe (3M ESPE, Germany). It was syringed around the impression copings to avoid impression defects around the copings and loaded in the custom tray. The tray was then carried onto the reference model immediately and the impression made. It was made sure that the tray seated completely in the three stops that were made in the reference model to ensure complete seating and proper positioning of the custom tray. The impression was allowed to set for 6 min as per the manufacturer's recommendation. The screws of the impression posts were unscrewed and the impression removed from the reference model [Figure 8]. A total of five impressions were made in each group in a similar manner. The implant replica was fastened on to the impression copings and impressions were poured using Type IV dental stone (Ultrarock, Kalabhai). A total of 10 master cast were obtained [Figure 9] and only one model was obtained from each impression.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Introduction:: An accurate and passive fit of implant framework prosthesis, as well as the successful surgical operation is suggested as one of the critical requirements for long-term implant success.

Objective:: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of the master cast using open tray impression technique with conventional and novel splinting materials.

Methodology:: A mandibular reference model with four ADIN implants was done. Ten custom trays were fabricated using the light curable resin sheets. Medium body polyether impression material was used. These trays were randomly divided between the two groups, with five trays in each group. Impression techniques were divided into two groups namely: Group A: Direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (GC pattern resin). Group B: Direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with Pro-temp TM 4 (bis-GMA) syringable temporization material. Thus, final impressions were made. Total of 10 master casts were fabricated. Evaluation of casts using Dynascope-Vision Engineering, TESA microhite two- dimension and coordinate measuring machine were used.

Results:: Statistical comparisons were made using ANOVA test and post-hoc test. Same amount of deviation values obtained with resin splinted and bis-GMA splinted impression copings.

Conclusion:: The master cast obtained by both the splinting material exhibits no difference from the reference model. So bis-GMA can be used, which is easy to handle, less time consuming, less technique sensitive, rigid, and readily available material in clinics.

No MeSH data available.