Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Del’Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
Data de Publicação: 2010
Outros Autores: Chávez, Alejandro Muñoz [UNESP], Amaral, Ângela Líbia Chagas [UNESP], Compagnoni, Marco Antonio [UNESP], De Assis Mollo, Francisco [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226095
Resumo: 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 µm (SD 2.16); SI, 38.03 µm (SD 9.29); ASI, 46.80 µm (SD 8.47); SE, 151.21 µm (SD 22.79); and ASE, 136.59 µm (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. © 2010 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.
id UNSP_b5614cf6947757d2f9b06aa79e68f022
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/226095
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesisDental implantImplant impression techniqueImpression materialPurpose: 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 µm (SD 2.16); SI, 38.03 µm (SD 9.29); ASI, 46.80 µm (SD 8.47); SE, 151.21 µm (SD 22.79); and ASE, 136.59 µm (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. © 2010 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.Araraquara University Center UNIARA, Araraquara, São PauloDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Araraquara Dental School São Paulo State University, Araraquara, São PauloDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Araraquara Dental School São Paulo State University, Araraquara, São PauloUNIARAUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Del’Acqua, Marcelo AntonialliChávez, Alejandro Muñoz [UNESP]Amaral, Ângela Líbia Chagas [UNESP]Compagnoni, Marco Antonio [UNESP]De Assis Mollo, Francisco [UNESP]2022-04-28T21:25:15Z2022-04-28T21:25:15Z2010-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article771-776International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 25, n. 4, p. 771-776, 2010.0882-2786http://hdl.handle.net/11449/2260952-s2.0-78049429474Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implantsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-28T21:25:15Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/226095Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462022-04-28T21:25:15Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
title Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
spellingShingle Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
Del’Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
Dental implant
Implant impression technique
Impression material
title_short Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
title_full Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
title_fullStr Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
title_sort Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis
author Del’Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
author_facet Del’Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
Chávez, Alejandro Muñoz [UNESP]
Amaral, Ângela Líbia Chagas [UNESP]
Compagnoni, Marco Antonio [UNESP]
De Assis Mollo, Francisco [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 Chávez, Alejandro Muñoz [UNESP]
Amaral, Ângela Líbia Chagas [UNESP]
Compagnoni, Marco Antonio [UNESP]
De Assis Mollo, Francisco [UNESP]
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv UNIARA
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Del’Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli
Chávez, Alejandro Muñoz [UNESP]
Amaral, Ângela Líbia Chagas [UNESP]
Compagnoni, Marco Antonio [UNESP]
De Assis Mollo, Francisco [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Dental implant
Implant impression technique
Impression material
topic Dental implant
Implant impression technique
Impression material
description 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 µm (SD 2.16); SI, 38.03 µm (SD 9.29); ASI, 46.80 µm (SD 8.47); SE, 151.21 µm (SD 22.79); and ASE, 136.59 µm (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. © 2010 by Quintessence Publishing Co Inc.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010-01-01
2022-04-28T21:25:15Z
2022-04-28T21:25:15Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 25, n. 4, p. 771-776, 2010.
0882-2786
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226095
2-s2.0-78049429474
identifier_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, v. 25, n. 4, p. 771-776, 2010.
0882-2786
2-s2.0-78049429474
url http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226095
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 771-776
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799965495283154944