Comparative Study of the Polyvinyl Siloxane Technique With Resin-Splinted Transfer Copings Used for Multiple Implant Abutment Impressions

Abstract

Resin-splinted transfer copings in condensation siloxane or irreversible hydrocolloid produced impressions as accurately as polyvinyl siloxane.

Determination of accuracy of multi implant impressions: A journey through time

“…Most studies had utilized polyether 14,[16][17][18]20,46,50,54,57,65,[74][75][76] (PE) impression material as a stock standard for playing out the accuracy assessment, including different factors, for example, impression system and angle of implant. Among the 17 studies [7][8][9]12,13,19,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] that studied the impression material contrasts, 15 of them looked at polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) and PE impression materials, [7][8][9]12,13,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] one analyzed vinyl siloxanether (VSE) with PE,19 and another thought about PVS with irreversible hydrocolloid. 49 Most of the studies 12,…”

“…Among the 17 studies [7][8][9]12,13,19,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] that studied the impression material contrasts, 15 of them looked at polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) and PE impression materials, [7][8][9]12,13,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] one analyzed vinyl siloxanether (VSE) with PE,19 and another thought about PVS with irreversible hydrocolloid. 49 Most of the studies 12,13,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] have indicated similar precision, with insignificant differences among PVS and PE for multi-implant impressions, however a couple others 7,8 have reported more accuracy with PVS in contrast with PE, but in some circumstances when the implants were placed subgingivally …”

“…19 Irreversible hydrocolloid with supporting was likewise tried and observed to be as exact as PVS with non-splinting in another recent investigations. 49 Splinting V/s non-splinting: Among all the studies analyzing the multi-unit Implants impression accuracy, the "impacts of splinting versus non-splinting" was the most researched territory, and furthermore the generally questionable. Of the 30 studies analysed, 10-18,46,49,50-68 13 supported the splinting technique, 10,11,15,16,18,46,[50][51][52][53][54][55][56] five supported non-supporting over splinting.…”

“…58,[65][66][67][68] and 13 found no significant difference between the supporting and non-splinting procedures with multi-unit Implants impressions. [12][13][14]17,49,[57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64] In addition to the simple comparative analysis, no connection was found between the quantity of implant and the splinting strategy (splinting and nonsplint) for edentulous ridge multi-unit impression accuracy. Among studies assessing four to six implants, 11 studies 10,11,15,16,18,46,50,51,[54][55][56] favored supporting contrasted with non-splinting and 11 demonstrated no differences [12][13][14]17,49,58,[60][61][62][63][64] between the two methodologies.…”

Current methods and techniques of implant impressions: A literature review

“…21,24,27,28,32,38,42,[53][54][55] Assuncao i wsp. 56 dowiedli ponadto, iż nie ma różnic w blokowaniu transferów żywicą akrylową samopolimeryzującą, żywicą świa-tłoutwardzalną oraz wcześniej dostosowaną metalową belką łączącą implanty.…”