Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants
The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three implant transfer impression techniques. Four groups (n = 5) were defined, according to the technique: TC - tapered copings without splint; SC - square copings without splint; SCS - square copings splinted with dental floss and acrylic resin...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica
2011-04-01
|
| Series: | Brazilian Oral Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242011000200011 |
| _version_ | 1811293534972542976 |
|---|---|
| author | Júlio César Brigolini de Faria Laís Regiane Silva-Concílio Ana Christina Claro Neves Milton Edson Miranda Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira |
| author_facet | Júlio César Brigolini de Faria Laís Regiane Silva-Concílio Ana Christina Claro Neves Milton Edson Miranda Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira |
| author_sort | Júlio César Brigolini de Faria |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three implant transfer impression techniques. Four groups (n = 5) were defined, according to the technique: TC - tapered copings without splint; SC - square copings without splint; SCS - square copings splinted with dental floss and acrylic resin, and CG (control group) - master model with four external hexagonal implants and a superstructure. Individual trays and polyether were used for the impression. All casts were checked for their fit into the master superstructure; for this, all four screws were placed in the implants. Digital photos were taken and images were analyzed using UTHSCSA ImageTool software. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way analysis of variance and Student’s t test (p < 0.05). The means and standard deviation were (µm): CG = 2.03 ± 0.00, TC = 14.74 ± 3.41, SC = 12.08 ± 2.56, and SCS = 6.51 ± 0.09. The control group was found to be statistically different from the TC and SC groups. Within the limitations of this study, all groups presented clinically acceptable standard gap values, and the SCS group showed no statistical difference in relation to the CG (control group), demonstrating more accuracy and fidelity to transfer implants. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:02:48Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9068120b627f4698adf66f10a6e6b289 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1806-8324 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:02:48Z |
| publishDate | 2011-04-01 |
| publisher | Sociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa Odontológica |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Brazilian Oral Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-9068120b627f4698adf66f10a6e6b2892022-12-22T03:01:16ZengSociedade Brasileira de Pesquisa OdontológicaBrazilian Oral Research1806-83242011-04-0125216316710.1590/S1806-83242011000200011Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implantsJúlio César Brigolini de FariaLaís Regiane Silva-ConcílioAna Christina Claro NevesMilton Edson MirandaMarcelo Lucchesi TeixeiraThe aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three implant transfer impression techniques. Four groups (n = 5) were defined, according to the technique: TC - tapered copings without splint; SC - square copings without splint; SCS - square copings splinted with dental floss and acrylic resin, and CG (control group) - master model with four external hexagonal implants and a superstructure. Individual trays and polyether were used for the impression. All casts were checked for their fit into the master superstructure; for this, all four screws were placed in the implants. Digital photos were taken and images were analyzed using UTHSCSA ImageTool software. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way analysis of variance and Student’s t test (p < 0.05). The means and standard deviation were (µm): CG = 2.03 ± 0.00, TC = 14.74 ± 3.41, SC = 12.08 ± 2.56, and SCS = 6.51 ± 0.09. The control group was found to be statistically different from the TC and SC groups. Within the limitations of this study, all groups presented clinically acceptable standard gap values, and the SCS group showed no statistical difference in relation to the CG (control group), demonstrating more accuracy and fidelity to transfer implants.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242011000200011Dental implantsDental ProsthesisDental impression technique |
| spellingShingle | Júlio César Brigolini de Faria Laís Regiane Silva-Concílio Ana Christina Claro Neves Milton Edson Miranda Marcelo Lucchesi Teixeira Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants Brazilian Oral Research Dental implants Dental Prosthesis Dental impression technique |
| title | Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| title_full | Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| title_short | Evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| title_sort | evaluation of the accuracy of different transfer impression techniques for multiple implants |
| topic | Dental implants Dental Prosthesis Dental impression technique |
| url | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1806-83242011000200011 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juliocesarbrigolinidefaria evaluationoftheaccuracyofdifferenttransferimpressiontechniquesformultipleimplants AT laisregianesilvaconcilio evaluationoftheaccuracyofdifferenttransferimpressiontechniquesformultipleimplants AT anachristinaclaroneves evaluationoftheaccuracyofdifferenttransferimpressiontechniquesformultipleimplants AT miltonedsonmiranda evaluationoftheaccuracyofdifferenttransferimpressiontechniquesformultipleimplants AT marcelolucchesiteixeira evaluationoftheaccuracyofdifferenttransferimpressiontechniquesformultipleimplants |