The Influence of Digital Fabrication Options on the Accuracy of Dental Implant–Based Single Units and Complete-Arch Frameworks

Abdel‐Azim, Tamer; Zandinejad, Amirali; Elathamna, Eiad; Lin, Wei‐Shao; Morton, Dean

doi:10.11607/jomi.3577

Cited by 56 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An in vitro study by Abdel‐Azim et al discovered the influence of computer‐aided impression options on the accuracy of dental implant‐based single units and complete‐arch frameworks. They reported that conventional impressions resulted in a smaller marginal discrepancy than digital methods for a single‐implant framework.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the milling method is standardized. 13 In fabrication of full-arch FDPs, digital impressions showed higher local deviations than conventional impressions did. As clinical implications of this study, it concluded that the accuracy of CAD/CAM systems and digital impressions is compatible with conventional impressions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Instead, dental CAD/CAM systems usually need fewer steps (i.e., digital impression, design, and milling), where the number of error sources is less than in the conventional method. Additionally, the milling method is standardized . In fabrication of full‐arch FDPs, digital impressions showed higher local deviations than conventional impressions did.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Ahlholm

Sipilä

Vallittu

et al. 2016

Journal of Prosthodontics

358

283

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digital impression techniques are a clinically acceptable alternative to conventional impression methods in fabrication of crowns and short FDPs. For fabrication of implant-supported crowns and FDPs, digital impression systems also result in clinically acceptable fit. Digital impression techniques are faster and can shorten the operation time. Based on this study, the conventional impression technique is still recommended for full-arch impressions.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Ahlholm

Sipilä

Vallittu

et al. 2016

Journal of Prosthodontics

358

283

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scanning of a single implant can be achieved with high predictability, as has been shown in several previous studies and case reports [41,42,43,44]. When using a monolithic restoration, a complete digital workflow is possible because the abutment and crown are virtually designed and manufactured in their final shape [44].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions—An In Vitro Study

Ribeiro

Herrero-Climent

Díaz-Castro

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital dental impressions with the accuracy of impressions obtained via conventional techniques. Methods: Two different master models were created, one with parallel implants (model 1) and the other with non-parallel implants (model 2). These reference master models included 4 Klockner KL RP implants (Klockner Implant System SA, Barcelona, Spain), which were juxta-placed and equidistant in the intermentoneal region. In model 1 the implants were placed parallel to each other, whereas in model 2 the implants were placed such that there was a divergence angle of 15° between the more distal implants, and a convergence angle of 15° between the two central implants. A total of four types of impressions were obtained from model 1 (four groups, n = 10 each), including closed tray impressions with replacement abutments; open tray impression groups for dragging copings, without splinting; open tray impressions for ferrules; and impressions obtained using the 3MTM True Definition Scanner system. For model 2 three groups were created (three groups, n = 10 each), including closed tray impressions with replacement abutments; open tray impression for dragging copings, without splinting; and impressions obtained using the 3MTM True Definition Scanner system. The master models and the models obtained using conventional methods were digitalized in order to compare them via an extraoral high-resolution scanner (Imetric IScan D104i, Porretruy, Switzerland). The STL (Stereo Lithography (format for transferring 3 dimensional shape information)) digital values were loaded into reverse-engineering software and superimposed with their respective STL master models in order to evaluate deviations in three dimensions. We then analyzed the squares of the deviations in the three axes and evaluated the median and the sum of the deviation square. Statistical analysis was performed using the IBM Corp. Released 2016. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. The normality of the distributions was analyzed according to a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The median comparison was performed using the differences between the medians, analyzed using non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests with a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: For model 1, the deviations of the digital impressions were smaller than those associated with the conventional techniques. The sum value in group D was 1,068,292, which was significantly lower than those of groups A, B, and C, which were shown to be 2,114,342, 2,165,491, and 1,265,918, respectively. This improvement was not observed when using model 2, however, where the conventional techniques yielded similar results. Group F simultaneously presented the lowest total square sum of the three deviations (1,257,835), indicating a significantly higher accuracy for this group in model 2, while the sum values were 1,660,975 and 1,489,328 for groups E and G, respectively. Conclusion: Digital impressions of full-arch models were abl...

show abstract

“…In a similar study (Ender and Mehl, 2015) The current literature supports the use of chairside digital scanning techniques for single unit restoration and, in some instances suggests that this may be optimal for longer span restorations (e.g. Abdel-Azim et al 2014). However the dimensional stability over time of polyvinyl siloxane material is still highly regarded (Nassar et al 2013).…”

Section: Increased Clinical Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 77%

Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by DMD students : instructional efficiency and attitudes toward technology.

Marti¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Influence of Digital Fabrication Options on the Accuracy of Dental Implant–Based Single Units and Complete-Arch Frameworks

Abstract: The conventional pathway resulted in a smaller marginal discrepancy for single-implant frameworks. In contrast, the digital pathway resulted in a smaller marginal discrepancy for full-arch implant frameworks.

Cited by 56 publications

References 0 publications

Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Review

Accuracy of Implant Casts Generated with Conventional and Digital Impressions—An In Vitro Study

Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by DMD students : instructional efficiency and attitudes toward technology.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About