Suppr超能文献

三种牙列印模技术和指数准确性的比较:一项体外研究。

Comparison of the accuracy for three dental impression techniques and index: an in vitro study.

机构信息

Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Araraquara Dental School, Univ Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, SP, Brazil.

出版信息

J Prosthodont Res. 2013 Oct;57(4):268-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jpor.2013.07.001. Epub 2013 Sep 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of stone index (I) and three impression techniques: tapered impression copings (T), squared impression copings (S) and modified squared impression copings (MS) for implant-supported prostheses.

METHODS

A master cast, with four parallel implant abutment analogs and a passive framework, were fabricated. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material was used for all impressions with two metal stock trays (open and closed tray). Four groups (I, T, S and MS) were tested (n=5). A metallic framework was seated on each of the casts, one abutment screw was tightened, and the gap between the analog of implant and the framework was measured with a stereomicroscope. The groups' measurements (80 gap values) were analyzed using software (LeicaQWin - Leica Imaging Systems Ltd.) that received the images of a video camera coupled to a Leica stereomicroscope at 100× magnification. The results were statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis One Way ANOVA on Ranks test followed by Dunn's Method, 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean values of abutment/framework interface gaps were: Master Cast=32 μm (SD 2); Group I=45 μm (SD 3); Group T=78 μm (SD 25); Group S=134 μm (SD 30); Group MS=143 μm (SD 27). No significant difference was detected among Index and Master Cast (P=.05).

CONCLUSION

Under the limitations of this study, it could be suggested that a more accurate working cast is possible using tapered impression copings techniques and stone index.

摘要

目的

本体外研究比较了石标(I)和三种印模技术的尺寸精度:锥形印模套(T)、方形印模套(S)和改良方形印模套(MS)在种植体支持的修复体中的应用。

方法

制作一个带有四个平行种植体基台模拟体和一个被动支架的标准模型。所有印模均使用乙烯基聚硅氧烷印模材料和两个金属库存托盘(开口托盘和闭合托盘)。将四个组(I、T、S 和 MS)进行测试(n=5)。将一个金属支架放置在每个模型上,紧固一个基台螺丝,并用体视显微镜测量模拟体和支架之间的间隙。使用软件(LeicaQWin-Leica Imaging Systems Ltd.)分析组的测量值(80 个间隙值),该软件接收连接到 Leica 体视显微镜的视频摄像头的图像,放大倍数为 100×。结果采用 Kruskal-Wallis 单向方差分析等级检验,然后采用 Dunn 法进行统计分析,检验水准为 0.05。

结果

基台/支架界面间隙的平均值为:标准模型=32μm(SD 2);组 I=45μm(SD 3);组 T=78μm(SD 25);组 S=134μm(SD 30);组 MS=143μm(SD 27)。石标和标准模型之间无显著差异(P=.05)。

结论

在本研究的限制范围内,可以认为锥形印模套技术和石标可以获得更精确的工作模型。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验