• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评价数字化方法中下颌四种植体模型的印模精度。

Evaluation of impression accuracy for a four-implant mandibular model--a digital approach.

出版信息

Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Aug;16(4):1137-42. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0622-z. Epub 2011 Oct 19.

DOI:10.1007/s00784-011-0622-z
PMID:22009182
Abstract

Implant-supported prosthodontics requires precise impressions to achieve a passive fit. Since the early 1990s, in vitro studies comparing different implant impression techniques were performed, capturing the data mostly mechanically. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of three different impression techniques digitally. Dental implants were inserted bilaterally in ten polymer lower-arch models at the positions of the first molars and canines. From each original model, three different impressions (A, transfer; B, pick-up; and C, splinted pick-up) were taken. Scan-bodies were mounted on the implants of the polymer and on the lab analogues of the stone models and digitized. The scan-body in position 36 (FDI) of the digitized original and master casts were each superimposed, and the deviations of the remaining three scan-bodies were measured three-dimensionally. The systematic error of digitizing the models was 13 μm for the polymer and 5 μm for the stone model. The mean discrepancies of the original model to the stone casts were 124 μm (±34) μm for the transfer technique, 116 (±46) μm for the pick-up technique, and 80 (±25) μm for the splinted pick-up technique. There were statistically significant discrepancies between the evaluated impression techniques (p ≤ 0.025; ANOVA test). The splinted pick-up impression showed the least deviation between original and stone model; transfer and pick-up techniques showed similar results. For better accuracy of implant-supported prosthodontics, the splinted pick-up technique should be used for impressions of four implants evenly spread in edentulous jaws.

摘要

种植体支持的修复需要精确的印模来实现被动适配。自 20 世纪 90 年代初以来,已经进行了许多体外研究来比较不同的种植体印模技术,这些研究主要通过机械手段来获取数据。本研究旨在数字化评估三种不同印模技术的准确性。在聚合物下颌模型的第一磨牙和尖牙位置双侧植入种植体。从每个原始模型中,分别制取三种不同的印模(A:转移印模;B:取模印模;C:夹板取模印模)。扫描体分别安装在聚合物上的种植体和石模型的实验室模拟体上,并进行数字化。将数字化原始模型和主模型中位置 36(FDI)的扫描体进行叠加,并三维测量剩余三个扫描体的偏差。模型数字化的系统误差对于聚合物为 13 μm,对于石模型为 5 μm。原始模型与石模型的平均差异为转移技术 124 μm(±34)μm,取模技术 116 μm(±46)μm,夹板取模技术 80 μm(±25)μm。评估的印模技术之间存在统计学上显著差异(p≤0.025;ANOVA 检验)。夹板取模印模在原始模型和石模型之间的偏差最小;转移和取模技术显示出相似的结果。为了提高种植体支持修复的准确性,应使用夹板取模技术均匀分布在无牙颌的四个种植体上进行印模。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of impression accuracy for a four-implant mandibular model--a digital approach.评价数字化方法中下颌四种植体模型的印模精度。
Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Aug;16(4):1137-42. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0622-z. Epub 2011 Oct 19.
2
Implant Impression Techniques for the Edentulous Jaw: A Summary of Three Studies.无牙颌种植印模技术:三项研究综述
J Prosthodont. 2016 Feb;25(2):146-50. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12305. Epub 2015 Jun 1.
3
Clinical study evaluating the discrepancy of two different impression techniques of four implants in an edentulous jaw.评估无牙颌中四种种植体两种不同印模技术差异的临床研究。
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Nov;17(8):1929-35. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0885-z. Epub 2012 Dec 6.
4
Digital evaluation of the accuracy of impression techniques and materials in angulated implants.角度种植体中印模技术和材料准确性的数字化评估
J Dent. 2014 Dec;42(12):1551-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.10.008. Epub 2014 Oct 23.
5
Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study.无支架和有支架印模技术制取无牙颌种植体模型精度的光学扫描研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Jun;23(6):676-681. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02219.x. Epub 2011 Jun 2.
6
Effect of splinted and nonsplinted impression techniques on the accuracy of fit of fixed implant prostheses in edentulous patients: a comparative study.夹板式和非夹板式印模技术对无牙颌患者固定种植义齿修复体适合性精度的影响:一项对比研究。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Nov-Dec;26(6):1267-72.
7
Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes.无牙患者的数字化与传统种植体印模:准确性结果
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Apr;27(4):465-72. doi: 10.1111/clr.12567. Epub 2015 Feb 13.
8
An in vitro comparison of photogrammetric and conventional complete-arch implant impression techniques.一种体外比较的摄影测量和传统的全弓种植体印模技术。
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Oct;110(4):243-51. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60370-4.
9
An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations.种植体印模的准确性比较:编码愈合基台和不同种植体角度的体外研究。
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Aug;110(2):90-100. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60346-7.
10
Effect of simulated intraoral variables on the accuracy of a photogrammetric imaging technique for complete-arch implant prostheses.模拟口腔内变量对全口种植体修复体摄影测量成像技术准确性的影响。
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Aug;120(2):232-241. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.11.002. Epub 2018 Mar 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of angulation on the 3D trueness of conventional and digital implant impressions for multi-unit restorations.角度对多单位修复体传统和数字化种植体印模三维准确性的影响。
J Adv Prosthodont. 2023 Dec;15(6):290-301. doi: 10.4047/jap.2023.15.6.290. Epub 2023 Dec 18.
2
Influence of Implant Impression Methods, Polymer Materials, and Implant Angulation on the Accuracy of Dental Models.种植体印模方法、聚合材料及种植体角度对牙模精度的影响
Polymers (Basel). 2022 Jul 11;14(14):2821. doi: 10.3390/polym14142821.
3
Comparison of the Accuracy of Fixture-Level Implant Impression Making with Different Splinting Techniques.

本文引用的文献

1
Digital evaluation of the reproducibility of implant scanbody fit--an in vitro study.数字化评估种植体扫描体适合度的可重复性——一项体外研究。
Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Jun;16(3):851-6. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0564-5. Epub 2011 Jun 4.
2
Comparison of the three-dimensional correctness of impression techniques: a randomized controlled trial.印模技术三维准确性的比较:一项随机对照试验。
Quintessence Int. 2010 Nov-Dec;41(10):845-53.
3
Impact of abutment rotation and angulation on marginal fit: theoretical considerations.基台旋转和角度对边缘适合性的影响:理论考虑。
不同夹板固定技术下种植体水平印模制取准确性的比较
Int J Dent. 2021 Oct 14;2021:2959055. doi: 10.1155/2021/2959055. eCollection 2021.
4
The Digital Abutment Check: An Improvement of the Fully Digital Workflow.数字基台检查:全数字工作流程的改进
Case Rep Dent. 2020 Oct 24;2020:8831862. doi: 10.1155/2020/8831862. eCollection 2020.
5
In vitro comparison of the accuracy of four intraoral scanners and three conventional impression methods for two neighboring implants.四种口内扫描仪和三种传统印模方法在两个相邻种植体中的准确性的体外比较。
PLoS One. 2020 Feb 27;15(2):e0228266. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228266. eCollection 2020.
6
Three-Dimensional Evaluation on Accuracy of Conventional and Milled Gypsum Models and 3D Printed Photopolymer Models.传统石膏模型、铣削石膏模型和3D打印光敏聚合物模型精度的三维评估
Materials (Basel). 2019 Oct 25;12(21):3499. doi: 10.3390/ma12213499.
7
Accuracy of new implant impression technique using dual arch tray and bite impression coping.使用双牙弓托盘和咬合印模帽的新型种植体印模技术的准确性
J Adv Prosthodont. 2018 Aug;10(4):265-270. doi: 10.4047/jap.2018.10.4.265. Epub 2018 Aug 17.
8
Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions.数字化与传统种植体印模的准确性。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jun;26(6):715-9. doi: 10.1111/clr.12375. Epub 2014 Apr 10.
9
Clinical study evaluating the discrepancy of two different impression techniques of four implants in an edentulous jaw.评估无牙颌中四种种植体两种不同印模技术差异的临床研究。
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Nov;17(8):1929-35. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0885-z. Epub 2012 Dec 6.
10
Computer-aided evaluation of preparations for CAD/CAM-fabricated all-ceramic crowns.计算机辅助评价 CAD/CAM 制作全瓷冠修复体的预备体。
Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Jun;17(5):1389-95. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0812-3. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Jul-Aug;25(4):752-8.
4
Accuracy of impression techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis.种植体支持式修复体印模技术的准确性。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Jul-Aug;25(4):715-21.
5
Evaluation of impression accuracy for implant at various angulations.不同倾斜角度下种植体印模精度的评估。
Implant Dent. 2010 Apr;19(2):167-74. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3181cd715f.
6
Effects of repeated manual disassembly and reassembly on the positional stability of various implant-abutment complexes: an experimental study.重复手动拆卸和组装对各种种植体-基台复合体的位置稳定性的影响:一项实验研究。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Jan-Feb;25(1):86-94.
7
Microbial leakage through the implant-abutment interface of Morse taper implants in vitro.体外研究莫氏锥度种植体-基台界面处微生物渗漏
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010 Mar;21(3):328-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01837.x. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
8
Theoretical optimum of implant positional index design.种植体位置指数设计的理论最优值。
J Dent Res. 2009 Aug;88(8):731-5. doi: 10.1177/0022034509341243.
9
Theoretical considerations: implant positional index design.理论考量:种植体位置指数设计
J Dent Res. 2009 Aug;88(8):725-30. doi: 10.1177/0022034509341172.
10
Molecular leakage at implant-abutment connection--in vitro investigation of tightness of internal conical implant-abutment connections against endotoxin penetration.种植体-基台连接部位的分子渗漏——研究内锥形种植体-基台连接部位密封性防止内毒素渗透的体外试验
Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Aug;14(4):427-32. doi: 10.1007/s00784-009-0317-x. Epub 2009 Jul 23.