Search

Purpose: To investigate, in vitro, the dimensional accuracy of two impression techniques (squared impression copings and squared impression copings sandblasted and coated with impression adhesive) made of vinyl polysiloxane and polyether impression materials. Materials and Methods: A master cast (control group) with four parallel implant abutment analogs, a passive framework, and a custom aluminum tray was fabricated. Four groups (n = 5 each group) were tested: squared Impregum (SI), squared Express (SE), sandblasted adhesive squared Impregum (ASI), and sandblasted adhesive squared Express (ASE). The measurement method employed was just one titanium screw tightened to the framework. A stereomicroscope was used to evaluate the fit of the framework by measuring the size of the gap between the abutment and the framework. The results were analyzed statistically. Results: The mean values for the abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast, 31.63 Mum (SD 2.16); SI, 38.03 Mum (SD 9.29); ASI, 46.80 Mum (SD 8.47); SE, 151.21 Mum (SD 22.79); and ASE, 136.59 Mum (SD 29.80). No significant difference was detected between the SI or ASI techniques and the master cast. No significant difference was detected between the SE and ASE techniques. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that Impregum Soft medium consistency was the best impression material and the impression technique did not influence the accuracy of the stone casts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:771-776. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of a stone index and of two impression techniques (squared impression copings and modified squared impression copings) for implant-supported prostheses. Materials and 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 a metal stock tray. Three groups of impressions were tested (n = 5): index (I), squared (S), and modified squared (MS). The measurement method employed was just one titanium screw tightened to the framework. The measurements (60 gap values) were analyzed using software that received the images from a video camera coupled to a stereomicroscope at 3100 magnification. The results were evaluated statistically (analysis of variance, Holm-Sidak method, a = .05). Results: The mean abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast = 31.63 Mum; group I = 45.25 Mum; group S = 96.14 Mum; group MS = 51.20 Mum. No significant difference was detected among the index and modified squared techniques (P = .05). Conclusion: Under the limitations of this study, the techniques modified squared and index generated more accurate casts than the squared technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:715-721. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of a stone index and of 3 impression techniques (tapered impression copings, squared impression copings, and squared impression copings splinted with acrylic resin) associated with 3 pouring techniques (conventional, pouring using latex tubes fitted onto analogs, and pouring after joining the analogs with acrylic resin) for implant-supported prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A mandibular brass cast with 4 stainless steel implant-abutment analogs, a framework, and 2 aluminum custom trays were fabricated. Polyether impression material was used for all impressions. Ten groups were formed (a control group and 9 test groups formed by combining each pouring technique and impression technique). Five casts were made per group for a total of 50 casts and 200 gap values (1 gap value for each implant-abutment analog). RESULTS: The mean gap value with the index technique was 27.07 microm. With the conventional pouring technique, the mean gap values were 116.97 microm for the tapered group, 57.84 microm for the squared group, and 73.17 microm for the squared splinted group. With pouring using latex tubes, the mean gap values were 65.69 microm for the tapered group, 38.03 microm for the squared group, and 82.47 microm for the squared splinted group. With pouring after joining the analogs with acrylic resin, the mean gap values were 141.12 microm for the tapered group, 74.19 microm for the squared group, and 104.67 microm for the squared splinted group. No significant difference was detected among Index, square/latex techniques, and master cast (P >.05). CONCLUSIONS: The most accurate impression technique utilized squared copings. The most accurate pouring technique for making the impression with tapered or squared copings utilized latex tubes. The pouring did not influence the accuracy of the stone casts when using splinted squared impression copings. Either the index technique or the use of squared coping combined with the latex-tube pouring technique are preferred methods for making implant-supported fixed restorations with dimensional accuracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because there is no consensus in the literature about the need for a splint between copings, the aim of this study was to evaluate, in vitro, the accuracy of 2 impression techniques for implant-supported prostheses. A master cast was fabricated with four parallel implant abutment analogs and a passive framework. Two groups with 5 casts each were formed: Group 1 (squared impression copings with no splint: S) and Group 2 (splinted squared impression copings, using metal drill burs and Pattern resin: SS). The impression material used was polyvinyl siloxane with open trays for standard preparation of the casts. For each cast, the framework was positioned, and a titanium screw was tightened with 10 N·cm torque in analog A, after which measurements of the abutment-framework interface gaps were performed at analogs C and D. This process was repeated for analog D. These measurements were analyzed using software. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a confidence interval of 95% was used to analyze the data. Significant differences were detected between S and SS in relation to the master cast (P ≤ 0.05). The median values of the abutment-framework interface gaps were as follows: master cast: 39.64 μm; squared impression copings with no splint: 205.86 μm; splinted squared impression copings: 99.19 μm. Under the limitations of this study, the technique presented for Group 2 produces better results compared with the technique used for Group 1.

The aim of this article is to describe a successful clinical protocol for prosthodontic rehabilitation of a patient with a skeletal Class III malocclusion using a fixed-detachable maxillary prosthesis supported by 6 implants and the MK1 attachment system. The patient was followed up for 8 years. A 46-year-old edentulous woman with a skeletal Class III malocclusion expressed dissatisfaction with her old existing maxillary denture from an esthetic point of view and frustration regarding its function. A fixed-detachable maxillary prosthesis using the MK1 attachment system was made. The patient was followed up clinically and radiographically for 8 years. No bone loss, fracture of prosthetic components, or fracture of the prosthesis was detected in that period. A fixed detachable maxillary prosthesis using the MK1 attachment system is a treatment option for patients with Class III malocclusions who opt not to undergo orthognathic surgery.

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., (Copyright © 2013 Japan Prosthodontic Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This in vitro study evaluated the dimensional accuracy of two impression techniques (tapered and splinted) with two stock trays (plastic and metal) for implant-supported prostheses., Materials and Methods: A master cast with four parallel abutment analogs and a passive framework were fabricated. Polyvinyl siloxane impression material was used for all impressions with two metal stock trays and two plastic stock trays (closed and open trays). Four groups (tapered plastic, splinted plastic, tapered metal, and splinted metal) and a control group (master cast) were tested (n = 5 for each group). After the framework was seated on each of the casts, one abutment screw was tightened, and the marginal gap between the abutment and framework on the other side was measured with a stereomicroscope. The measurements were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance on ranks test followed by the Dunn method., Results: The mean values (± standard deviations) for the abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast, 32 ± 2 Μm; tapered metal, 44 ± 10 Μm; splinted metal, 69 ± 28 Μm; tapered plastic, 164 ± 58 Μm; splinted plastic, 128 ± 47 Μm. No significant difference was detected between the master cast, tapered metal, and splinted metal groups or between the tapered and splinted plastic groups., Conclusions: In this study, the rigidity of the metal stock tray ensured better results than the plastic stock tray for implant impressions with a high-viscosity impression material (putty). Statistically similar results were obtained using tapered impression copings and splinted squared impression copings. The tapered impression copings technique and splinted squared impression copings technique with a metal stock tray produced precise casts with no statistically significant difference in interface gaps compared to the master cast.