Comparison of different impression techniques when using the All-on-Four implant treatment protocol

Siadat, H. and Alikhasi, M. and Beyabanaki, E. and Rahimian, S. (2016) Comparison of different impression techniques when using the All-on-Four implant treatment protocol. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 29 (3). pp. 265-270.

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2....
DOI: UNSPECIFIED

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of two different impression techniques for the All-on-Four implant therapy protocol. Materials and Methods: An acrylic resin analog for an edentulous maxilla with four internal connection implants (Replace Select, Nobel Biocare) was fabricated according to the All-on-Four protocol. A total of 40 impressions were made with different techniques (open and closed tray) at abutment and implant levels and poured in type IV dental stone. A coordinate measuring machine was used to record the x, y, and z coordinates and angular displacement. The measurements were compared with those obtained from the reference model. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance and t test at a = .05. Results: There was less linear and rotational displacement for the open-tray technique when compared with the closed-tray technique (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively). Impressions made at abutment level produced fewer linear and rotational displacements when compared with implantlevel impressions using the open-tray technique for straight and angulated implants (P = .04 and P < .001, respectively). However, less rotational dislocation was observed for impressions made with the closed-tray technique when compared with the open-tray technique at implant level (P < .001). Conclusion: Choice of impression technique affected the accuracy of impressions, and less displacement was observed with the open-tray method. Abutment-level impressions with an open-tray technique were more accurate, while implant-level impressions were more accurate when a closed-tray technique was used. © 2016 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: cited By 0
Uncontrolled Keywords: tooth implant, anatomic model; comparative study; dental abutment; dental impression; devices; edentulousness; human; materials testing; maxilla; pathology; rotation; standards; surface property; tooth implant, Dental Abutments; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Materials Testing; Maxilla; Models, Anatomic; Rotation; Surface Properties
Subjects: Medicine
Divisions: Faculty of Dentistry > Department of Dental and Oral Surgery
Depositing User: editor . 2
Date Deposited: 08 Mar 2017 18:30
Last Modified: 08 Mar 2017 18:30
URI: http://eprints.kaums.ac.ir/id/eprint/226

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item