Pera Francesco, Pesce Paolo, Bevilacqua Marco, Setti Paolo, Menini Maria
*Lecturer, Department of Fixed and Implant Prosthodontics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. †Lecturer, Department of Fixed and Implant Prosthodontics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. ‡Research Fellow, Department of Fixed and Implant Prosthodontics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy. §Assistant Professor, Department of Fixed and Implant Prosthodontics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
Implant Dent. 2016 Apr;25(2):232-7. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000353.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 7 different implant impression techniques for full-arch prostheses.
A master cast simulating an edentulous arch with 4 implants was used. Seven impression techniques were tested: open tray with polyether Impregum (OTI); open tray with splint-polyether Impregum (OTSI); closed tray with polyether Impregum; open tray with polyether Ramitec; open tray with splint-polyether Ramitec; closed tray with polyether Ramitec (CTR); open tray with impression plaster (OTP). Five impressions of the master cast were taken for each technique using an impression simulator device. Casts were realized based on those impressions (n = 35). Median values of deviation from the master cast were recorded for each cast through a 3-dimensional laser scanner.
Only OTI (P = 0.028) and OTSI (P < 0.001) presented a statistically significant difference compared to the master cast. OTP (P = 0.99) and CTR (P = 0.10) showed median values of deviation close to zero (-0.001 and -0.003 mm, respectively).
Stiff impression materials (such as plaster or rigid polyether) guarantee greater accuracy in cases of multiple implant impressions of patients with full-arch rehabilitations. Splinting of impression copings with acrylic resin did not improve accuracy.
本研究旨在评估7种不同的全牙弓修复体种植体印模技术的准确性。
使用模拟有4颗种植体的无牙颌弓的主模型。测试了7种印模技术:带聚醚印模胶的开放托盘(OTI);带夹板 - 聚醚印模胶的开放托盘(OTSI);带聚醚印模胶的封闭托盘;带聚醚Ramitec的开放托盘;带夹板 - 聚醚Ramitec的开放托盘;带聚醚Ramitec的封闭托盘(CTR);带印模石膏的开放托盘(OTP)。使用印模模拟器设备对每种技术的主模型取5次印模。基于这些印模制作模型(n = 35)。通过三维激光扫描仪记录每个模型与主模型偏差的中位数。
与主模型相比,只有OTI(P = 0.028)和OTSI(P < 0.001)呈现出统计学上的显著差异。OTP(P = 0.99)和CTR(P = 0.10)显示偏差的中位数接近零(分别为 - 0.001和 - 0.003 mm)。
硬质印模材料(如石膏或硬质聚醚)在全牙弓修复患者的多个种植体印模情况下可保证更高的准确性。用丙烯酸树脂夹板固定印模帽并不能提高准确性。