Assunção Wirley Gonçalves, Tabata Lucas Fernando, Cardoso Alessandra, Rocha Eduardo Passos, Gomes Erica Alves
Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araçatuba Dental School, UNESP-São Paulo State University, Brazil.
Implant Dent. 2008 Sep;17(3):248-56. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e318182ef58.
: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare 3 impression techniques for osseointegrated implant transfer procedures.
: (1) Group Splinted with Acrylic Resin (SAR), impression with square copings splinted with prefabricated autopolymerizing acrylic resin bar; (2) Group Splinted with Light-Curing Resin (SLR), impression with square copings splinted with prefabricated light-curing composite resin bar; (3). Group Independent Air-abraded (IAA), impression with independent square coping aluminum oxide air-abraded. Impression procedures were performed with polyether material, and the data obtained was compared with a control group. These were characterized by metal matrix (MM) measurement values of the implants inclination positions at 90 and 65 degrees in relation to the matrix surface. Readings of analogs and implant inclinations were assessed randomly through graphic computation AutoCAD software. Experimental groups angular deviation with MM were submitted to analysis of variance and means were compared through Tukey's test (P < 0.05).
: There was no statistical significant difference between SAR and SLR experimental groups and MM for vertical and angulated implants. Group IAA presented a statistically significant difference for angulated implants.
: It was concluded within the limitations of this study, that SAR and SLR produced more accurate casts than IAA technique, which presented inferior results.
本研究的目的是评估和比较用于骨整合种植体转移程序的三种印模技术。
(1)丙烯酸树脂夹板组(SAR),使用预制的自凝丙烯酸树脂杆夹板固定方形顶盖进行印模;(2)光固化树脂夹板组(SLR),使用预制的光固化复合树脂杆夹板固定方形顶盖进行印模;(3)独立气磨组(IAA),使用独立的方形顶盖经氧化铝气磨后进行印模。使用聚醚材料进行印模程序,并将获得的数据与对照组进行比较。这些数据的特征是种植体相对于基质表面在90度和65度倾斜位置的金属基质(MM)测量值。通过图形计算AutoCAD软件随机评估类似物和种植体倾斜度的读数。将实验组与MM的角度偏差进行方差分析,并通过Tukey检验比较均值(P < 0.05)。
对于垂直和有角度的种植体,SAR和SLR实验组与MM之间无统计学显著差异。IAA组对于有角度的种植体呈现出统计学显著差异。
在本研究的局限性内得出结论,SAR和SLR比IAA技术产生的模型更准确,IAA技术的结果较差。