Background: Comparatively evaluate the accuracy of two different implant impression techniques. Materials & methods: For the present study, reference models used were an edentulous mandibular cast with four implant analogues in the anterior region and a metallic insert in the posterior. Two impression techniques were studied as followed: Group 1: Polyvinyl siloxane impressions (putty and light body) using stock metal tray, and Group 2: Polyether impressions (medium body) using stock metal tray. Connection of the impression posts was done to implant analogues with the screws tightened manually such that their flat surfaces were facing buccally. The longer impression posts were connected to the anterior analogues and shorter were connected to the posterior analogues. A self-calibration test was performed to determine the accuracy obtained by the single evaluator. Results: Mean error among the specimens of Group 1 was 0.0441 while mean error among the specimens of Group 2 was 0.0425 respectively. While comparing the mean error among the two study groups, non-significant results were obtained. Conclusion: From the above results, the authors concluded that both the impression techniques can be used with equal effectiveness in implant procedures.

Present study aimed to improve the bond strength of denture teeth to acrylic resin denture base by chemical or mechanical modification on the bonding surface of denture teeth. Total 40 artificial acrylic resin central incisors and lateral incisors were divided into five groups: group I, 8 samples without modification (control group); group II, 8 samples (bonding surface of teeth were treated with monomer); group III, 8 samples (bonding surface of teeth were treated with monomer and the glaze layer removed with aluminum oxide stone bur); group IV, 8 samples (bonding surface of teeth were treated with acetone); and group V, 8 samples (acetone application followed by glaze layer removed with aluminum oxide stone bonding surface of acrylic resin teeth). They were mounted on wax blocks, and the blocks were acrylized. The bond strength values were obtained by subjecting the samples to shear compressive load under universal testing machine. The results were subjected to statistical analysis. The mean value of bond strength was highest for group E (modified by aluminum oxide abrasion prior to dichloromethane application), followed by group C (modified by aluminum oxide abrasion prior to monomer application), group D (modified by dichloromethane application), group B (modified by monomer application).