scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review.

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
The review of abutment level or implant level internal connection implants indicated that more studies reported greater accuracy with the splint technique than with the nonsplint technique, compared with situations in which there were 3 or fewer implants.
Abstract
Statement of problem Various implant impression techniques, such as the splint, pick-up, and transfer techniques, have been introduced, and some techniques may be more accurate than others. Also, clinically, some factors, including the angulation or depth of implants, may affect the accuracy of the implant impressions. Purpose The purposes of this review were to: (1) investigate the accuracy of published implant impression techniques, and (2) examine the clinical factors affecting implant impression accuracy. Material and methods An electronic search was performed in June 2008 of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases with the key words implant, implants, impression, and impressions. To be included, the study had to investigate the accuracy of implant impressions and be published in an English peer-reviewed journal. In addition, a hand search was performed to enrich the results for the time period from January 1980 to May 2008. After executing the search strategies, 41 articles were selected to be included in the review process. Results All of the selected articles were in vitro studies. Of the 17 studies that compared the accuracy between the splint and nonsplint techniques, 7 advocated the splint technique, 3 advocated the nonsplint technique, and 7 reported no difference. Fourteen studies compared the accuracy of pick-up and transfer impression techniques, and 5 showed more accurate impression with the pick-up techniques, 2 with the transfer technique, and 7 showed no difference. The number of implants affected the comparison of the pick-up and splint techniques. Eleven studies compared the accuracy of polyether and vinyl polysiloxane (VPS), and 10 of 11 reported no difference between the 2 materials. Four studies examined the effect of implant angulation on the accuracy of impressions. Two studies reported higher accuracy with straight implants, while the other 2 reported there was no angulation effect. Conclusions The review of abutment level or implant level internal connection implants indicated that more studies reported greater accuracy with the splint technique than with the nonsplint technique. For situations in which there were 3 or fewer implants, most studies showed no difference between the pick-up and transfer techniques, whereas for 4 or more implants, more studies showed higher accuracy with the pick-up technique. Polyether and VPS were the recommended materials for the implant impressions. (J Prosthet Dent 2008;100:285-291)

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes

TL;DR: Digital impressions resulted in a more time-efficient technique than conventional impressions, and patients preferred the digital impression technique rather than conventional techniques.
Journal ArticleDOI

Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: A pilot study

TL;DR: Based on the intraoral scans obtained, distance and angulation errors were too large to fabricate well-fitting frameworks on implants in edentulous mandibles, and the main reason for the unreliable scans seemed to be the lack of anatomic landmarks for scanning.
Journal ArticleDOI

Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review

TL;DR: Implant divergence appears to affect negatively impression accuracy when using internal connection implants, and proper preload may decrease the incidence of such a complication.
Journal ArticleDOI

Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review.

TL;DR: The splinted impression technique is more accurate for both partially and completely edentulous patients, and the open-tray technique ismore accurate than the closed-trays for completely edenting patients, but for partially edentous patients there seems to be no difference.
Journal ArticleDOI

Accuracy of a Digital Impression System Based on Parallel Confocal Laser Technology for Implants with Consideration of Operator Experience and Implant Angulation and Depth

TL;DR: Evaluating the accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal red laser technology, taking into consideration clinical parameters such as operator experience and angulation and depth of implants found the performance of the operator was not necessarily dependent on experience.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

The glossary of prosthodontic terms.

TL;DR: A triangular, full thickness flap from the lower lip used to fill in a deficit in the upper lip for the relief of deformity due to double harelip.
Journal ArticleDOI

Experimental breakdown of peri‐implant and periodontal tissues. A study in the beagle dog

TL;DR: The objective of the present experiment was to study lesions in the peri-implant and periodontal tissues resulting from ligature placement and subgingival plaque formation in beagle dogs and revealed that clinical and radiographic signs of tissue destruction were more pronounced at implants than at teeth.
Journal ArticleDOI

Microbial findings at failing implants.

TL;DR: The results indicate that the microbiota of the healthy peri-implant sulci is similar to that from corresponding conditions around teeth, however, in peri -implant areas staphylococci, enterics and yeasts were found almost as frequently as periopathogens indicating differences as compared to the microbiota around periodontitis affected teeth.
Journal ArticleDOI

Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit

TL;DR: The dental literature was reviewed to identify the clinical methods that have been used to evaluate implant framework fit and it is suggested that clinicians use a combination of the available methods to minimize misfits.
Related Papers (5)