Technical Comment: Response to Camacho

Schielzeth, Holger; Streitner, Corinna; Lampe, Ulrike; Franzke, Alexandra; Reinhold, Klaus

doi:10.1111/evo.12991

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To avoid the potential inaccurate replication of the desired soft‐tissue profile caused by ISPR removal, a new IOS protocol has recently been proposed (Schielzeth et al, 2016). In this protocol, the emergence profile was obtained from the dentition with the ISPR in place, and the cuff‐like peri‐implant submucosal contour was obtained by superimposing the digital image data of the ISPR on the implant site (Liu et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the implant‐supported provisional restoration on the accuracy of digital peri‐implant mucosa replication–A clinical study

Xiong

Sun

Huang

et al. 2022

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the effect of implant-supported provisional restorations (ISPRs) on the accuracy of the intraoral scanned peri-implant soft-tissue profile in the esthetic area. Materials and Methods:Sixteen patients with a single ISPR in the maxillary central incisor's region were recruited for this study. Three impression methods were sequentially used in each patient: (1) an intraoral scanning (IOS) with the ISPR, (2) a conventional impression using the ISPR as impression coping, and (3) a routine IOS without the ISPR. The stereolithography files of the three impression methods obtained from the same patient were superimposed, and the conventional impression method was used as the reference model. Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) analyses were performed to measure the peri-implant soft-tissue deviation between the reference models and IOS from the groups with or without the ISPR, respectively. Data were presented as the means ± standard deviations. Two-way analyses of variance with post hoc Sidak's multiple comparisons and paired t-tests were performed for 2D and 3D analyses, respectively. The significance level was set at p < .05. Results:The peri-implant mucosa without the ISPR immediately collapsed (<20 s), particularly on the palatine side of the labial mucosa and labial side of the palatine mucosa. Consequently, the IOS without the ISPR led to 414.7 ± 116.0 μm of overall dimensional deformation in the cuff-like submucosal region, which was significantly larger (p < .0001) than that in the IOS with the ISPR (230.6 ± 85.5 μm). Conclusion:Implant-supported provisional restorations are important for accurate replication of the intraorally scanned peri-implant soft-tissue profile.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%