Filho Humberto Gennari, Mazaro José Vitor Quinelli, Vedovatto Eduardo, Assunção Wirley Gonçalves, dos Santos Paulo Henrique
Department of Dental Materials and Prostheses, School of Dentistry at Aracatuba, São Paulo State University, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Prosthodont. 2009 Feb;18(2):172-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2008.00325.x. Epub 2008 Oct 13.
The aim of this study was to compare splinting techniques for impression copings of osseointegrated implants with different angulations.
Replicas (N = 24) of a metal matrix (control) containing two implants at 90 degrees and 65 degrees in relation to the horizontal surface were obtained by using four impression techniques: Technique 1 (T1), direct technique with square copings without union in open trays; Technique 2 (T2), square copings splinted with dental floss and autopolymerizing acrylic resin; Technique 3 (T3),square copings splinted with dental floss and autopolymerizing acrylic resin, sectioned and splinted again with autopolymerizing acrylic resin; Technique 4 (T4), square copings splinted with prefabricated acrylic resin bar. The impression material was polyether. The replicas were individually scanned to capture the images, which were assessed in a graphic computation program. The program allowed the angulation between the bases of the replicas and the reading screws to be measured. The images of the replicas were compared with the matrix image (control), and the differences in angulations from the control image were calculated. The analysis of variance and the Tukey test for comparisons (p < 0.05) were used for statistical analysis.
All groups showed significant differences in the implant angulations in comparison with the control group (p < 0.05). Group T1 showed the highest difference (1.019 degrees ) followed by groups T2 (0.747 degrees ), T3 (0.516 degrees ), and T4 (0.325 degrees ), which showed the lowest angular alteration compared to the control group. There were significant differences between inclined and straight implants in all the groups, except in group T4.
Based on the results, the splinting of pick-up impression copings is indicated for osseointegrated implant impressions. The square copings splinted with a prefabricated acrylic resin bar presented the best results among the pick-up impression techniques evaluated in this study.
本研究旨在比较针对不同角度的骨整合种植体印模帽的夹板技术。
通过四种印模技术获得了金属基质(对照)的复制品(N = 24),该金属基质包含两个相对于水平面呈90度和65度角的种植体:技术1(T1),在开放托盘内使用方形帽且无连接的直接技术;技术2(T2),用牙线和自凝丙烯酸树脂夹板固定方形帽;技术3(T3),用牙线和自凝丙烯酸树脂夹板固定方形帽,切开后再用自凝丙烯酸树脂夹板固定;技术4(T4),用预制丙烯酸树脂棒夹板固定方形帽。印模材料为聚醚。对复制品进行单独扫描以获取图像,并在图形计算程序中进行评估。该程序可测量复制品底部与读数螺钉之间的角度。将复制品的图像与基质图像(对照)进行比较,并计算与对照图像角度的差异。采用方差分析和Tukey检验进行比较(p < 0.05)以进行统计分析。
与对照组相比,所有组在种植体角度方面均显示出显著差异(p < 0.05)。T1组差异最大(1.019度),其次是T2组(0.747度)、T3组(0.516度)和T4组(0.325度),T4组与对照组相比角度改变最小。除T4组外,所有组中倾斜种植体和直种植体之间均存在显著差异。
基于结果,对于骨整合种植体印模,建议采用取模印模帽的夹板固定。在本研究评估的取模印模技术中,用预制丙烯酸树脂棒夹板固定的方形帽效果最佳。