These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Three Different Impression Materials Using Three Different Techniques for Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Study.
    Author: Khan SA, Singh S, Neyaz N, Jaiswal MM, Tanwar AS, Singh A.
    Journal: J Contemp Dent Pract; 2021 Feb 01; 22(2):172-178. PubMed ID: 34257178.
    Abstract:
    AIM: To compare the dimensional accuracy of polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, and polyether polyvinyl siloxane hybrid impression materials using closed tray, open tray splinted, and open tray nonsplinted coping impression techniques and to find out the best suitable impression material and technique combination for implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample size of the study was 45. The combinations of materials and techniques were divided into nine groups, namely polyvinyl siloxane with closed tray, polyvinyl siloxane with open tray nonsplinted copings, polyvinyl siloxane with open tray splinted copings, polyether with closed tray, polyether with open tray nonsplinted copings, polyether with open tray splinted copings, polyvinyl siloxane-polyether hybrid with closed tray, polyvinyl siloxane-polyether hybrid with open tray nonsplinted copings, and polyvinyl siloxanepolyether hybrid with open tray splinted copings. Five samples of each group were evaluated. A total of 45 impressions were taken. A stainless steel master metal framework with three internal hex implants was fabricated and used to generate the samples. A common condensation silicone putty spacer was applied over the impression copings attached to the implants, which was then duplicated. All trays were fabricated on this duplicated silicone die using light cure acrylic resin. Trays to be used for open tray techniques had their top removed for gaining access to screws of the impression copings. Splinting of coping for OS group was done using pattern resin. Impressions were poured, and master cast was generated. Interimplant distance was measured using stereomicroscope and an image analyzing software. RESULTS: Open nonsplinted technique resulted in significantly better replication of implant positions compared to open splinted and closed techniques. Hybrid impression material depicted significantly better dimensional accuracy than polyether and polyvinyl siloxane. Hybrid open nonsplinted depicted least mean difference in interimplant distance, followed by hybrid open splinted and polyether open splinted groups. Polyvinyl siloxane closed tray showed maximum difference in interimplant distance in comparison with other groups. CONCLUSION: Polyvinyl siloxane-polyether hybrid impression material and open nonsplinted technique gave best replication of implant positions on the master cast. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Accuracy of impressions and casts is of great importance for the fabrication and long-term clinical success of precisely fitting implant-retained prostheses.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]