Dang Liem, Woliansky Matthew, Palamara Joseph, Abduo Jaafar
Restorative Section, Melbourne Dental School, Melbourne University.
J Oral Sci. 2020 Sep 26;62(4):439-443. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.19-0482. Epub 2020 Sep 9.
This study evaluated the effect of a modified tray design on the accuracy of implant impressions in comparison with the non-splinted and splinted impression techniques. Two titanium frameworks were produced to fit two parallel implants and two divergent implants with a 15 angle. According to the frameworks employed, two acrylic resin master models were fabricated. For each model, 10 impressions were taken with every technique. The maximum framework principal strain was calculated for every generated cast. For the parallel implant model, the strains of the non-splinted (118.4 με), splinted (89.0 με), and modified tray design impression (49.4 με) techniques were statistically similar (P = 0.16). For the divergent implant model, all the impression techniques showed a considerably higher strain than the parallel implant model. The splinted (287.0 με) and the modified (262.9 με) tray design impression techniques showed similar strains for the divergent implant model, which were significantly less than the strains for the non-splinted impression (518.0 με) technique (P < 0.05). Therefore, for two parallel implants, all the impression techniques exhibited similar accuracy. When angulation existed between the implants, the splinted and the modified tray design impression techniques were more accurate than the non-splinted impression technique.
本研究评估了改良托盘设计与非夹板式和夹板式印模技术相比,对种植体印模准确性的影响。制作了两个钛框架,分别适配两个平行种植体和两个呈15°角的发散种植体。根据所使用的框架,制作了两个丙烯酸树脂母模。对于每个模型,每种技术都取了10次印模。计算每个生成铸件的最大框架主应变。对于平行种植体模型,非夹板式(118.4με)、夹板式(89.0με)和改良托盘设计印模(49.4με)技术的应变在统计学上相似(P = 0.16)。对于发散种植体模型,所有印模技术的应变均显著高于平行种植体模型。对于发散种植体模型,夹板式(287.0με)和改良(262.9με)托盘设计印模技术的应变相似,且显著低于非夹板式印模(518.0με)技术的应变(P < 0.05)。因此,对于两个平行种植体,所有印模技术的准确性相似。当种植体之间存在角度时,夹板式和改良托盘设计印模技术比非夹板式印模技术更准确。