Comparative evaluation of the effect of impression materials and trays on the accuracy of angulated implants impressions

Siadat, Hakimeh; Saeidi, Zeinab; Alikhasi, Marzieh; Zeighami, Somayeh

doi:10.4317/jced.55227

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A marginal numerical advantage was observed for VPES over PVS. Siadat et al (12,13) observed a smaller discrepancy for VPES and suggested it as a material of choice for direct and indirect impression techniques Higher tensile strength and better flow properties of VPES can make it more advantageous and preferred to other impression materials. Baig et al (11) determined that the accuracy of the VPES impression material was comparable with that of PE for multi-implant abutment level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fit precision depends on many factors, among which the impression and an accurate master cast are vital components (6). The factors that influence the cast accuracy are the characteristics of the impression material, technique, type of tray, die material, implant angulation, and fit tolerance between the implant components and transfer copings (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). In the case of multiple implants, the quality of the final impression and transfer of the exact positions of the implants to the model are of utmost importance (13).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials in direct implant impression technique for multiple dental implants

Rajendran¹,

Chander²,

Anitha³

et al. 2021

eor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study compared the dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression materials used for non-splinted (NS) and splinted (S) direct open-tray impression techniques for multiple implants inserted in simulated edentulous mandibles. Materials and MethodsA mandibular stainless steel model with eight internal connections for implant analogs was fabricated to simulate a clinical scenario. The acrylic resin splinted and non-splinted direct impressions were obtained for both VPES and PVS materials. Seventy-two cast samples were divided into four groups based on the impression techniques and materials used. The dimensional accuracies of the casts were measured in three different axes using a computerized coordinate measuring machine (CMM), and were statistically compared. ResultsThe differences in the distortion values between the VPES and PVS impression materials were not statistically significant. Similarly, the differences between the splinted and non-splinted groups among the VPES and PVS materials were not statistically significant. ConclusionThe casts fabricated from VPS or PVS impression materials provide similar dimensional accuracy regardless of the implant splinting method.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials in direct implant impression technique for multiple dental implants

Rajendran¹,

Chander²,

Anitha³

et al. 2021

eor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was observed that the measurement of dimensional accuracy and coefficient of variation displayed a significant difference in the assessment, thereby concluding that the closed tray technique produces a more dimensionally accurate impression with a lower coefficient of variation than the open tray technique. (5,8,9,2) Yet another in vivo comparative research study was conducted by Gallucci GO et al in 2011 to compare the accuracy outcomes of the open tray and closed tray impression techniques in partially edentulous patients treated with implants. The study measured the outcomes subjectively and objectively.…”

Section: Open Tray Versus Closed Tray Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Study of Conventional versus Digital Impression Taking in Implant Dentistry- A Systematic Review

Hussien¹,

Mallesh²

2019

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C T BACKGROUNDDental implants are one of the most sought-after choice of treatment for restoration and rehabilitation of missing teeth. However, the accuracy of removable or fixed superstructures over the dental implants is influenced for a major proportion by the impression techniques and materials. This paper discusses the comparison of the accuracy of different conventional impression materials and techniques and the intra oral scanners, used in the second stage of the dental implant treatment. The objective of the paper is to compare the accuracy of impressions obtained using conventional impression and intra oral scanners, in the second stage of the dental implant treatment. METHODSIn order to perform the study, a PICO framework was formulated, and the topic of the paper was rephrased accordingly. The PICO framework for the topic of interest chosen is outlined. The keywords were thoroughly searched in scientific databases including the Cochrane Library of Databases, PubMed Central, Wiley Online Library and Google Scholar. The key terms used for the search were dental implants, impression materials, impression techniques, digital impression, intra oral scanners, accuracy and success. RESULTSAmong the different impression materials taken into the comparative study for the conventional impressions, it was observed that polyvinyl siloxane exhibited a dimensional accuracy slightly greater than polyether. However, light body putty exhibited greater accuracy than medium body putty. Various impression techniques were compared to evaluate the dimensional accuracy of the impression. It was observed that the open tray technique and splinted impression technique produced a more dimensionally stable impression than the other techniques. Among conventional and digital impressions, it was observed that intra oral scanners exhibited a greater degree of accuracy. CONCLUSIONSThis study is to comparatively assess the accuracy of conventional and digital impression of dental implants in the second stage of treatment. Although accuracy is greater in digital impressions since there is no likelihood of distortions or dimensional changes or any delay in pouring of models; however, incomplete capture of sub-gingival details, image obscured due to bleeding are possible with intra-oral scanners. Hence, between conventional and digital impressions, the dentist may gradually need to upgrade to the technology and advancements.

show abstract

“…Studies reported the addition-type silicones as one of the most dimensionally accurate materials for making impression. [ 12 13 ] Owing to the recent improvements in impression materials, dimensional accuracy is currently more dependent on the adopted impression technique rather than the material itself. [ 7 12 ] Nonetheless, some studies have claimed that the impression technique has no impact on the dimensional accuracy of impressions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of core materials on the dimensional accuracy of casts made of two different silicone impression materials: An experimental study

Farzin

Derafshi

Giti

et al. 2020

J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A BSTRACT Background and Aim: Dimensional accuracy of impressions is crucial to the quality of fixed restorations. This accuracy can be highly affected by the type of core and impression materials. This study aimed to assess the effect of different core materials on dimensional accuracy of two silicone impression materials. Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, three master core models were fabricated of amalgam, composite resin, and nickel–chromium. Of each model, 30 impressions were taken; 15 with additional and 15 with condensational silicone impression material. The accuracy of impressions of the three core materials was assessed by measuring two linear dimensions and one vertical dimension on the stone casts. Statistical Analysis: Data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance and Scheffe post hoc test (α = 0.05). Results: Accuracy of the three measured dimensions was significantly affected by both the impression and core materials ( P < 0.05). Additional silicone was significantly more accurate in linear dimensions, and impressions of the amalgam core were significantly more accurate than other cores in linear dimensions. Conclusion: Additional silicone impression material had more detail reproduction, and the impressions of amalgam core were more accurate than the composite and nickel–chromium core materials.

show abstract

Comparative evaluation of the effect of impression materials and trays on the accuracy of angulated implants impressions

Cited by 7 publications

References 15 publications

Dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials in direct implant impression technique for multiple dental implants

Dimensional accuracy of vinyl polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials in direct implant impression technique for multiple dental implants

A Comparative Study of Conventional versus Digital Impression Taking in Implant Dentistry- A Systematic Review

Effect of core materials on the dimensional accuracy of casts made of two different silicone impression materials: An experimental study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About