International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2014 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Accuracy of Direct Implant Impression Technique using Different Splinting Materials

Sunantha Selvaraj, Jayashree Mohan, Paul Simon, Jayachandran Dorairaj

Citation Information : Selvaraj S, Mohan J, Simon P, Dorairaj J. Comparison of Accuracy of Direct Implant Impression Technique using Different Splinting Materials. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2014; 4 (3):82-89.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1112

Published Online: 01-09-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; The Author(s).


Abstract

Introduction

The accuracy of an impression remains critical factor in achieving passive fit of an implant framework. The accuracy of the master cast would depend on the type of impression material, the implant impression technique and accuracy of die material. The different impression techniques advocated in the literature for implant impressions include direct (open tray) and indirect (closed tray) techniques. Direct technique use square impression copings that are picked up in the impressions which were used in this study.

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of direct impression made with resin splinted and bis-GMA splinted open-tray impression coping. Thus to compare the accuracy of impressions obtained using different splinting materials.

Materials and Methods

A wax mandibular reference model was fabricated and four implants were placed in the mandibular anterior region using surveyor and acrylized with clear heat cure acrylic resin using injection molding technique. Spaced primary cast was fabricated with a uniform thickness of space about 2 mm. Ten custom trays were fabricated using the light curable resin sheets. Medium body polyether impression material was used. Pentamix was used to get a uniform mix. These trays were randomly divided among the two groups, with five trays in each group. Impression techniques were divided into two groups namely:

  Group A - direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (GC pattern resin), group B - direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with Protemp TM4 (bis- GMA) syringable temporisation material. Thus, final impressions were made. Total of 10 master casts were fabricated. Evaluation of casts using Dynascope-Vision engineering, Tesa Microhite 2D and coordinate measuring machine were used.

Results

Statistical comparisons were made using ANOVA test and post-hoc test. Same amount of deviation values obtained with resin splinted and bis-GMA splinted impression copings. The difference in the values might be because of the variation in the rigidity of the materials used.

Conclusion

Both the splinting material exhibit similar accuracy in impression, so bis-GMA can be used, which is easy to handle, less time consuming, less technique sensitive, rigid and readily available material in clinics, instead of resin splinted material which is technique sensitive, more time consuming and cumbersome.

How to cite this article

Selvaraj S, Mohan J, Simon P, Dorairaj J. Comparison of Accuracy of Direct Implant Impression Technique using Different Splinting Materials. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2014;4(3):82-89.


PDF Share
  1. Comparison of transfer precision of three different impression materials in combination with transfer caps for the Frialit-2 system. J Oral Rehabil 2000;27:629-638.
  2. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:121-132.
  3. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:323-331.
  4. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416.
  5. Comparison of impression techniques for a five- implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:448-455.
  6. Accuracy of replacing three tapered transfer impression copings in two elastomeric impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 1993; 6:377-383.
  7. Tissue-integrated prosthesis: Osseointegration in clinical dentistry in 1985;Publisher:Quintessence.
  8. Accuracy and dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosth Dent 1979;42:159-162.
  9. The accuracy of implant master casts constructed from transfer impressions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:331-336.
  10. An evaluation of impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:444-447.
  11. Comparison of impression techniques for a two- implant 15ş divergent model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:468-475.
  12. Evaluation of master cast techniques for multiple abutment implant prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8(4):439-445.
  13. The accuracy of three implant impression techniques: a three-dimensional analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 1994;9(5):533-540.
  14. A comparison of the dimensional accuracy of the splinted and unsplinted impression techniques for the bone-lock implant system. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:68-75.
  15. Evaluation of the accuracy of three techniques used for multiple implant abutment impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:186-192.
  16. Implant cast accuracy as a function of impression techniques and impression material viscosity. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:669-674.
  17. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi- implant system with an internal hex connection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:39-47.
  18. Effect of subgin- gival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accu- racy of the implant impression: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:107-113.
  19. The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2008 b;100: 285-291.
  20. A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant transfer techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69:588-593.
  21. Accuracy of implant impression techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:216-222.
  22. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prosthese. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:470-476.
  23. Evaluation of accuracy of multiple dental implant impressions using various splinting materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:38-44.
  24. The accuracy of three implant impression techniques: a three dimensional analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:533-540.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.