Suppr超能文献

比较两种不同的无牙上颌印模托盘握持技术

On Comparing Two Different Tray-Holding Techniques for Edentulous Maxillary Impressions.

作者信息

Rignon-Bret Christophe, Mushegyan Vagan, Naveau Adrien

出版信息

Int J Prosthodont. 2016 Mar-Apr;29(2):169-72. doi: 10.11607/ijp.4347.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study compared tissue three-dimensional (3D) displacements during the material setting phase of two maxillary impression tray-holding techniques: clinician manual pressure and patient occlusal pressure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The resultant two maxillary casts for each of 10 edentulous patients were compared using an optical 3D measurement system.

RESULTS

The junction between the hard and soft palates acted like a rotation center during impression making. The vertical displacements were significantly lower and posteriorly set when the impression was taken with the patient's occlusion, in contrast to being located at the anterior two-thirds during the manual impression technique.

CONCLUSION

Use of patient's occlusion as a tray-holding technique may be preferred during the material setting phase of maxillary impressions.

摘要

目的

本研究比较了两种上颌印模托盘固定技术在材料凝固阶段的组织三维(3D)位移:临床医生手动施压和患者咬合施压。

材料与方法

使用光学3D测量系统对10名无牙患者的每组两个上颌模型进行比较。

结果

在制取印模过程中,硬腭和软腭的交界处起到了旋转中心的作用。与手动印模技术时位于前三分之二处相比,当患者咬合制取印模时,垂直位移明显更低且位置更靠后。

结论

在上颌印模材料凝固阶段,使用患者咬合作为托盘固定技术可能更可取。

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