In Vitro Measurements of Precision of Fit of Implant‐Supported Frameworks. A Comparison between “Virtual” and “Physical” Assessments of Fit Using Two Different Techniques of Measurements

Jemt, Torsten; Hjalmarsson, Lars

doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00416.x

Cited by 68 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…; Hjalmarsson et al. ; Jemt & Hjalmarsson ; Papaspyridakos et al. ) have been used to assess the misfit between the reconstructions and the implants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel digital imaging techniques to assess the outcome in oral rehabilitation with dental implants: a narrative review

Benić

Elmasry

Hämmerle

2015

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the digital imaging techniques have not yet sufficiently been validated to be used for outcome measures in implant dentistry. In clinical research, cone beam CT (CBCT) is increasingly being used for 3D assessment of bone and soft tissue following augmentation procedures and implant placement. Currently, there are no effective methods for the reduction of artifacts around implants in CBCT. Optical scanning is being used for the 3D assessment of changes in the soft tissue contour. The combination of optical scan with pre-operative CBCT allows the determination of the implant position and its spatial relation to anatomical structures. Spectrophotometry is the method most commonly used to objectively assess the color match of reconstructions and peri-implant mucosa to natural dentition and gingiva. New optical imaging techniques may be considered possible approaches for monitoring peri-implant soft tissue health. MRI and ultrasonography appear promising non-ionizing radiation imaging modalities for the assessment of soft tissue and bone defect morphologies. Optical scanners and OCT may represent efficient clinical methods for accurate assessment of the misfit between the reconstructions and the implants.

show abstract

“…; Hjalmarsson et al. ; Jemt & Hjalmarsson ; Papaspyridakos et al. ) have been used to assess the misfit between the reconstructions and the implants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Novel digital imaging techniques to assess the outcome in oral rehabilitation with dental implants: a narrative review

Benić

Elmasry

Hämmerle

2015

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). Other superimposition techniques used in the literature are using one parallel implant as a reference, “least squares method” and “zero method” (Jemt & Hjalmarsson ). The accuracy outcomes may be dependent on the type of reference scanner used in the digitization of the conventionally produced casts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital vs. conventional full‐arch implant impressions: a comparative study

Amin

Weber

Finkelman

et al. 2016

Clinical Oral Implants Res

192

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since endosseous implants are functionally ankylosed, they are in direct contact with the bone, as a result lack inherent mobility of the periodontal ligament [4]. On the contrary natural teeth have the ability to resist horizontal, vertical, and rotational forces because of the stress bearing capacity of the periodontal ligament.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of Impression Trays and Impression Materials on the Accuracy of Open Tray Implant Impressions: A Pilot Study

Gupta

Narayan

Balakrishnan

2017

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. For a precise fit of multiple implant framework, having an accurate definitive cast is imperative. The present study evaluated dimensional accuracy of master casts obtained using different impression trays and materials with open tray impression technique. Materials and Methods. A machined aluminum reference model with four parallel implant analogues was fabricated. Forty implant level impressions were made. Eight groups (n = 5) were tested using impression materials (polyether and vinylsiloxanether) and four types of impression trays, two being custom (self-cure acrylic and light cure acrylic) and two being stock (plastic and metal). The interimplant distances were measured on master casts using a coordinate measuring machine. The collected data was compared with a standard reference model and was statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results. Statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) was found between the two impression materials. However, the difference seen was small (36 μm) irrespective of the tray type used. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed between varied stock and custom trays. Conclusions. The polyether impression material proved to be more accurate than vinylsiloxanether impression material. The rigid nonperforated stock trays, both plastic and metal, could be an alternative for custom trays for multi-implant impressions when used with medium viscosity impression materials.

show abstract

In Vitro Measurements of Precision of Fit of Implant‐Supported Frameworks. A Comparison between “Virtual” and “Physical” Assessments of Fit Using Two Different Techniques of Measurements

Abstract: Measurements of fit between frameworks and models may vary depending on what technique is used and how fit assessments regarding "virtual" or "physical" fit is approached.

Cited by 68 publications

References 25 publications

Novel digital imaging techniques to assess the outcome in oral rehabilitation with dental implants: a narrative review

Novel digital imaging techniques to assess the outcome in oral rehabilitation with dental implants: a narrative review

Digital vs. conventional full‐arch implant impressions: a comparative study

In Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of Impression Trays and Impression Materials on the Accuracy of Open Tray Implant Impressions: A Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About