Search

Implant-retained auricular prostheses provide an excellent treatment option with better retention and stability than a conventionally retained prosthesis. This article presents a technique for auricular reconstruction for a patient with misplaced implants. The scanning process combined the use of an intraoral scanner and a facial scanner to enhance accuracy in space management for different parts of the auricular prosthesis and to reduce sculpting time., (Copyright © 2020 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: A dental impression is a negative imprint of an oral structure that can be used to produce a positive cast of a patient's teeth as a permanent record. The accuracy of the impression affects the accuracy of the cast, and a precise impression is needed in order to create prosthesis with optimal fitting. Minimization of misfit is an important aim in prosthesis science and dental implants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the materials and techniques used to take an impression on the vertical misfit of implant-supported, screw-retained, three-unit bridges. Materials and Methods: The principal model used was an acrylic block with two ITI implants. A 1.5-mm abutment was attached to fixtures with torque of 25 N.cm. A base-metal framework was built on the abutment in the acrylic block. The abutments of the acrylic model were unscrewed and fixture-level impressions were made. The impression techniques included open/closed-tray techniques and the impression materials were polyether and polyvinyl siloxane. Forty acrylic custom trays were built for each impression. The marginal gap in the framework at three points (buccal, lingual, and distal) was measured using an optical microscope with ×250. Results: It is demonstrated that in all 360 evaluated samples, the mean vertical misfit in polyether samples of molar and premolar teeth was significantly lower than in polyvinyl siloxane (P < 0.001 and P = 0.017, respectively) in all three locations of the molar and lingual premolar examined (buccal, lingual, and distal), the mean vertical misfit of the polyether samples was significantly lower than those of polyvinyl siloxane (P < 0.01). On the other hand, although the mean vertical misfit using the open-tray technique in the molar teeth was significantly lower than with the closed-tray method (P = 0.002), no statistical difference was seen between the open-tray and closed-tray technique in general (P = 0.87). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions can be drawn: The impression method had no effect on marginal discrepancy of 3-unit screw retained fixed partial dentures. A higher marginal accuracy was obtained using polyether impression material compared to polyvinyl siloxane. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accurate impression making is an essential prerequisite for achieving a passive fit between the implant and the superstructure. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of open-tray and three closed-tray impression techniques. Materials and Methods: Three acrylic resin mandibular master models with four parallel implants were used: Biohorizons (BIO), Straumann tissue-level (STL), and Straumann bone-level (SBL). Forty-two putty/wash polyvinyl siloxane impressions of the models were made using open-tray and closed-tray techniques. Closed-tray impressions were made using snap-on (STL model), transfer coping (TC) (BIO model) and TC plus plastic cap (TC-Cap) (SBL model). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the positional accuracy of the implant analog heads in each dimension (x, y and z axes), and the linear displacement (ΔR) were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (α = 0.05). Results: The ΔR values of the snap-on technique were significantly lower than those of TC and TC-Cap techniques (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between closed and open impression techniques for STL in Δx, Δy, Δz and ΔR values (P = 0.444, P = 0.181, P = 0.835 and P = 0.911, respectively). Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, the snap-on implant-level impression technique resulted in more three-dimensional accuracy than TC and TC-Cap, but it was similar to the open-tray technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The final position of the abutment changes with the amount of tightening torque. This could eventually lead to loss of passivity and marginal misfit of prostheses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of three different tightening torques on the marginal adaptation of 3-unit cement-retained implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Materials and Methods: Two implants (Straumann) were inserted in an acrylic block so that one of the implants was placed vertically and the other at a 15° vertical angle. A straight abutment and a 15° angulated abutment were connected to the vertically and obliquely installed implants, respectively, so that the two abutments were parallel. Then, 10 cement-retained FDPs were waxed and cast. Abutments were tightened with 10,20,and 35 Ncmtorques, respectively. Following each tightening torque, FDPs were luted on respective abutments with temporary cement. The marginal adaptation of the retainers was evaluated using stereomicroscope. FDPs were then removed from the abutments and were sectioned at the connector sites. The retainers were luted again on their respective abutments. Luting procedures and marginal adaptation measurement were repeated. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and least significant difference tests (α = 0.05). After cutting the FDP connectors, the independent samples t-test was used to compare misfit values (α = 0.05). Results: Following 10,20, and 35 Ncm tightening torques, the marginal discrepancy of the retainers of FDPs significantly increased (P < 0.05).There was no significant difference between the marginal discrepancies of these two retainers (P > 0.05).The marginal gap values of angulated abutment retainers (ANRs) were significantly higher than those of the straight abutment after cutting the connectors (P = 0.026). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the marginal misfit of cement-retained FDPs increased continuously when the tightening torque increased. After cutting the connectors, the marginal misfit of the ANRs was higher than those of the straight abutment retainers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]