Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Basic and Clinical Research

Prosthetic Transfer Impression Accuracy Evaluation for Osseointegrated Implants

Assunção, Wirley Gonçalves DDS, MSc, PhD*; Tabata, Lucas Fernando DDS, MSc; Cardoso, Alessandra DDS; Rocha, Eduardo Passos DDS, MSc, PhD§; Gomes, Érica Alves DDS, MSc

Author Information
doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e318182ef58
  • Free


Implant treatment success is related to correct surgical-prosthetic planning associated with proper treatment, that will allow adequate distribution of functional loads to implant and supporting tissue.

Passive adaptation of the prosthesis-implant-retention-screw unit is extremely relevant for implant supported prosthesis because the absence of passive fit can induce failure such as screw loosening or fracture, biofilm accrual caused by components nonadaptation and even loss of osseointegration.1

Various factors are responsible for this passivity. Among them there are prosthetic components quality, metallic alloy, inclusion, casting, soldering, and prosthesis finishing procedures. Another important factor is the transfer impression clinical procedure.2 However, investigation on prosthetic laboratories showed that most procedures are performed inadequately and laboratories have frequently received impressions for complete prostheses without marginal integrity, impression material separated from tray adhesive, air bubble, among others problems,3 that may cause inaccuracy in transferring the spatial position of implants from the oral cavity to the master cast.

The accuracy of casts requires an appropriate selection of impression materials and trays. Nevertheless, knowledge about techniques and applications for each case are necessary, as well as clinician skills. In this context, many studies have shown that elastomeric impression materials, especially addition silicone and polyether, are the most indicated for transfer impression procedures due to their increased linear stability, lower residual shrinkage during storage, greater rigidity, and lack of rotation resistance of the coping inside the impression, leading to a more accurate cast.4–6

Besides this, different transfer impression techniques for implant-supported prostheses are suggested to obtain a working cast that will provide passive fit between prosthetic components and osseointegrated implants.7 In 1985, Branemark et al.8 emphasized the importance of impression copings splinted with dental floss scaffolding covered with autopolymerizing acrylic resin for transfer impression and nowadays, this same technique has been used by others with minor modifications7 and have proven to be a secure impression procedure,2 although Humphries et al.9 (1990), Hsu et al.10 (1993), and Herbst et al.11 (2000) found no significant difference between the values obtained with acrylic-splinted versus unsplinted copings in impression techniques.

Assunção et al.4 (2004) conducted an evaluation of casts accuracy obtained from transfer impression of implants with 4 different inclinations (90, 80, 75, and 65 degrees) using 3 different techniques (conical impression copings, independent square impression copings, and square impression copings splinted with autopolymerizing acrylic resin) associated with 4 impression materials (condensation silicone, addition silicone, polysulfide, and polyether). They concluded that the most favorable implant inclination position was perpendicular to the surface (90 degrees); and that to avoid implant position distortion, splinted impression copings in association with addition silicone, and polyether impression materials were indicated for providing more accurate casts.

Vigolo et al.,7 (2003) stated that many complicated and time-consuming techniques have been described to achieve passively fitting prostheses in situations involving multiple implant restorations. So they evaluated the accuracy of different impression techniques for multiple implants using square impression copings previously airborne particle-abraded and coated with manufacturer-recommended impression adhesive before final impression procedures, and compared with square impression copings splinted together with autopolymerizing acrylic resin and nonmodified square impression copings. It was concluded that improved accuracy of the master cast was achieved either with square copings joined together with autopolymerizing acrylic resin and with square copings that had been airborne particle-abraded and adhesive-coated.

It is possible to observe literature2,4,7,11 that presents different techniques of transfer impression with the purpose of minimizing or eliminating implant positioning distortion and ensuring passive fit between implant and prosthetic components. Although, diverse studies2,4,7–11 have been conducted about impression procedure, different results2,4,7–11 related to influence of splinting transfer have been observed. Based on this data, the objective of this study was to compare 3 different transfer impression techniques for osseointegrated implants with 2 different inclinations; one being perpendicular to the surface and the other with 65 degrees of inclination.

Materials and Methods

For this study, 2 external connection implants of 3.75 × 10.0 mm (Master Screw, Conexão, Conexão Sistemas de Prótese Ltd., São Paulo, SP, Brazil) were positioned in a metal matrix (MM) with 3.5 × 2.0 × 2.0 cm dimension, being one perpendicular the other with 65 degrees of inclination in relation to the surface (Fig. 1). Thirty customized trays were made with autopolymerizing acrylic resin (JET, Artigos Odontológicos Clássico Ltd., São Paulo, SP, Brazil), with 3 mm relief for impression material during MM impression and consequent obtention of the replicas.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.:
(A) metal matrix with retention screw positioned, showing implants inclination of 90 and 65 degrees. Experimental groups: (B) transfers copings splinted with prefabricated autopolymerizing acrylic resin bar (SAR); (C) transfers copings splinted with prefabricated light-curing composite resin bar (SLR); D) independent transfers copings abraded with aluminum oxide (IAA).

Polyether medium viscosity impression material (Impregum Soft, 3M Espe Dental, Medizin, Germany) was utilized with its specific tray adhesive (Polyether Adhesive, 3M Espe Dental, Medizin, Germany) for the 3 different techniques, characterizing the experimental groups, being: Group Splinted with Acrylic Resin (SAR), impression with square copings screwed on the implants through mechanic torquimeter with 10 N/cm (025020, Conexão, Conexão Sistemas de Prótese Ltd., São Paulo, SP, Brazil) and splinted with prefabricated autopolymerizing acrylic resin bar (Duralay, Reliance Dental MGF Company, Worth, IL); Group Splinted with Light-Curing Resin (SLR), impression with square copings screwed on the implants through mechanic torquimeter with 10 N/cm and splinted with prefabricated light-curing composite resin bar (Concept, Vigodent S/A, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil); Group Independent Air-abraded (IAA), impression with independent square coping previously air-abraded with aluminum oxide (Aluminum Oxide, Bio-Art Equipamentos Odontológicos Ltd., São Carlos, SP, Brazil) of 50 microns and under 75 lbs pressure, screwed on the implants through mechanic torquimeter with 10 N/cm (Fig. 1). Control group was characterized by MM implant inclination measurement values.

During the polymerization of the impression material, a 5 kg weight was utilized to standardized pressure, to allow the excess of material to flow out and maintain the pressure constant throughout the working time.4 The set impression/matrix was placed in distilled water at 36°C ± 1°C and maintained in a preheated kiln at 37°C for a polymerizing period of 9 minutes, according to manufacturer instruction and 19th American Dental Association specification12 (1977).

The set impression/matrix was separated with the help of a metallic handle device screwed into the MM base and the implant analogs (013020, Conexão; Conexão Prosthesis Systems Ltd., São Paulo, SP, Brazil) were adapted and screwed into the copings inside the impression. Thirty minutes after the set impression/matrix separation, type V dental stone (Durone, Dentsply Indústria e Comércio Ltd, Petrópolis, RJ, Brazil) was manipulated according to a powder/water ratio of 30 g/9 mL (recommended by the manufacturer) in a vacuum mechanic mixer for 60 seconds and poured under constant vibration. The samples were obtained after 120 minutes with separation of set impression/cast. With these procedure, 30 matrix replicas were obtained and were divided into 3 groups (n = 10): Group SAR, Group SLR, and Group IAA.

Sample Readings

After the preparation of the sample groups (SAR, SLR, and IAA), the implant analog inclination readings were taken for each replica and for the MM (control group), assessed by graphic computation, utilizing the AutoCAD computer program (AutoCAD 2005, Autodesk Inc., San Rafael, CA).

For this, each replica was digitalized in a scanner (Scan Jet 6100C, Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA), where the surface (top edge) of the matrix was parallel to the horizontal plan, as a reference for the verification of the implant analog inclinations. The images were then exported to AutoCAD for the inclination readings of the implant analog in each situation (90 and 65 degrees) and in each specimen. The readings were carried out randomly for each specimen and for each analog (90 and 65 degrees) (Fig. 2). Three nonsequential readings were made for each implant analog, totaling 6 readings for each specimen, 60 readings for each group, and 180 readings for the 3 groups; in addition to 3 readings for each implant in the MM used in every comparison with the control group.

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.:
Implant analog inclination readings based on digitalized image of the replica conducted through AutoCAD software.

The data obtained after the readings for each analyzed group, and for each implant inclination, were summarized in a table and submitted to statistical analysis with 2 comparisons made by analysis of variance and Tukey test (α < 0.05). The groups SAR, SLR, and IAA were compared for each inclination (90 and 65 degrees), and also compared with the data obtained from the MM readings. The absolute differences between the SAR, SLR, and IAA group readings were compared with the respective MM values.


Table 1 demonstrates no significant statistical difference among the 3 experimental groups, when the techniques were analyzed specifically for 90 degrees implant inclination. When analyzing the 3 groups of impression transfer techniques specifically for the 65 degrees implant inclination, no statistical difference was observed between the SAR (0.23 degrees) and SLR (0.51 degrees) groups (P < 0.05), whereas IAA (2.15 degrees) group demonstrated a statistically significant difference for the SAR and SLR groups.

Table 1
Table 1:
Tukey Test for Groups Mean in Relation to 90 and 65 Degrees Inclination Factor (P > 0.05)


The accuracy of master casts depend on various aspects cited in the literature such as impression material utilized,6,13 transfer impression technique,9,13,14 the accuracy of the die material,15 and the pouring technique of the master cast.10,16

Different transfer impression techniques have been developed for implant rehabilitation17; and the major difference among these techniques rely on the impression coping been incorporated and removed with the impression (pickup transfer impression with square copings) or, being repositioned into the impression only after the tray has been removed from the patient's mouth (repositioning transfer impression with conical copings).

A number of authors present the pickup transfer impression technique associated with the splinting procedure as the most indicated to provide accuracy for master casts.1,4,18,19 Impression copings splinted during pickup transfer impression avoid displacement and even impression distortion of the impression copings, and also ensure satisfactory adaptation between the prosthesis and the implant.4,20,21

In agreement with the results of various researches in the literature,1,4,18–20,21 this study verified statistically significant difference between unsplinted group (IAA) and splinted groups (SAR and SLR) with relation to angulated implants. The SAR and SLR groups presented better results (lower angular difference with the MM measurement) when comparison was done with experimental IAA group.

According to Vigolo et al.7 (2003), improved accuracy of master casts would be achieved with airborne copings. However, in the present study, it was observed that IAA group presented higher angular deviation from MM for angulated implants (65 degrees).

There was no statistically significant difference between groups SAR and SLR with splinted impression copings. However, clinically, the use of autopolymerizing acrylic resin could be easier than light-curing composite resin, because it does not require neither a dry environment nor a specific light-curing device.

Assunção et al.4 (2004), evaluated transfer impression accuracy for implants with 90, 80, 70, and 65 degrees and concluded that implant orientation and positions were not accurately reproduced in working casts when implants were too angulated (65 degrees). Similar results were found in this study, in which implants with different inclinations (90 and 65 degrees) were utilized. For the angulated implant of IAA group, the use of independent abraded copings did not avoid micromovement of the coping inside the impression.

When implants are positioned in limited spaces, nonfavorable positions or adverse angulations, an even more careful transfer impression needs to be performed,22 and the use of splinted square copings are indicated to avoid inaccuracy in transferring the spatial orientation of implants intraorally to the definitive cast.


Based on the obtained results and within this study, it was concluded that:

  • Splinted square impression coping techniques using prefabricated autopolymerizing acrylic resin bar (SAR) and prefabricated light-curing composite resin bar (SLR) presented better results when compared with unsplinted technique using independent square coping aluminum oxide air-abraded (IAA) (P > 0.05).
  • In relation to nonangulated implants (90 degrees) there was no significant difference among the studied groups (SAR, SLR and IAA) (P > 0.05).
  • In relation to the angulated implant (65 degrees), there was a statistical significant difference between group IAA and groups SLR and SAR (P > 0.05).
  • Nonangulated implants (90 degrees) provide more accurate casts than angulated implants.


The authors claim to have no financial interest, directly or indirectly, in any entity that is commercially related to the products mentioned in this article.


1. Naconecy MM, Teixeira ER, Shikai RS, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of 3 transfer techniques for implant-supported prostheses with multiple abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:192-198.
2. Nissan J, Barnea E, Krauze E, et al. Impression technique for partially edentulous patients. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;88:103-104.
3. Christensen GJ. Complex fixed and implant prosthodontics: Making nearly foolproof impressions. J Am Dent Assoc. 1992;123:69-70.
4. Assunção WG, Gennari-Filho H, Zaniquelli O. Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations. Implant Dent. 2004;13:358-366.
5. Christensen GJ. Implant prosthodontics contribute to restorative dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 1990;121:340–341, 344; 346 passim Erratum in: J Am Dent Assoc. 1990;121:582.
6. Wee AG. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:323-331.
7. Vigolo P, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Evaluation of the accuracy of three techniques used for multiple implant abutment impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89:186-192.
8. Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence; 1985:11-12; 253-257.
9. Humphries RM, Yaman P, Bloem TJ. The accuracy of implant master casts constructed from transfer impressions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5:331-336.
10. Hsu CC, Millstein PL, Stein RS. A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant transfer techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;69:588-593.
11. Herbst D, Nel JC, Driessen CH, et al. Evaluation of impression accuracy for osseointegration implant supported superstructures. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:555-561.
12. Revised American Dental Association Specification no. 19 for Non-aqueous, Elastomeric Dental Impression Materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 1977;94:733-741.
13. Barrett MG, de Rijk WG, Burgess JO. The accuracy of six impression techniques for osseointegrated implants. J Prosthodont. 1993;2:75-82.
14. Assif D, Nissan J, Varsano I, et al. Accuracy of implant impression splinted techniques: Effect of splinting material. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14:885-888.
15. Wee AG, Schneider RL, Auilino SA, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of solid implant casts. J Prosthodont. 1998;7:161-169.
16. Vigolo P, Millstein PL. Evaluation of master cast technique for multiple implant prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993;8:439-346.
17. Phillips K, Goto Y. Alternative implant impression techniques. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2002;23:170-172, 174.
18. Carr AB. Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991;6:448-455.
19. Rodney J, Johansen R, Harris W. Dimensional accuracy of two implant impression copings. J Dent Res. 1991;70:385; Abstract no 953.
20. Assif D, Marshak B, Schmidt A. Accuracy of implant impression techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996;11:216-222.
21. Shiau J, Chen L, Wu C. An accurate impression method for implant prosthesis fabrication. J Prosthet Dent. 1994;72:23-25.
22. Chaimattayompol N, Arbree NS, Wong SX. A simple method of making an implant level impression when presented with limited space, unfavorable implant positions, or problematic implant angulations. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87:684-687.

Abstract Translations


AUTOR(EN): Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, DDS, MSc, PhD, Lucas Fernando Tabata, DDS, MSc, Alessandra Cardoso, DDS, Eduardo Passos Rocha, DDS, MSc, PhD, Érica Alves Gomes, DDS, MSc. Korrespondenz an: Prof. Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 Vila Mendonça, CEP 16015-050 Araçatuba—SP BRASILIEN. Telefon/Fax: (18)3636-3245, e-Mail:[email protected]

Beurteilung der Abdruckgenauigkeit bei prothetischen Transferabläufen für knochengewebsintegrierende Implantate

ZUSAMMENFASSUNG:Zielsetzung: Die vorliegende Studie zielte darauf ab, drei unterschiedliche Abdruckstechniken für Transferabläufe bei knochengewebsintegrierenden Implantaten zu beurteilen und zu vergleichen. Methoden & Materialien: 1. Gruppe SAR, Abdruck mit quadratischen Abdruckkappen, gespant mit vorgefertigtem autopolymerisierendem Acrylharzblock; 2. Gruppe SLR, Abdruck mit quadratischen Abdruckkappen, gespant mit vorgefertigtem lichtabweisendem Verbundacrylharzblock; 3. Gruppe IAA, Abdruck mit unabhängigen quadratischen Abdruckkappen aus luftgestrahltem Aluminiumoxid. Die Abdrücke erfolgten mit Polyäthermaterial und die dabei gesammelten Angaben wurden mit einer Kontrollgruppe verglichen. Diese wurden durch Metallmatrixmesswerte der Implantatneigung bei 90 und 65 Grad im Verhältnis zur Matrixoberfläche charakterisiert. Die abgelesenen Analogdaten und Implantatneigungswerte wurden zufällig durch grafische Berechnung mittels AutoCAD R14-Software bewertet. Die Winkelabweichung der Versuchsgruppen mit Metallmatrix wurden zwecks Varianzanalyse (ANOVA) übergeben und die Durchschnittswerte per Tukey-Test verglichen (p < 0,05). Ergebnisse: Es ergaben sich keine statistisch signifikanten Unterschiede zwischen den SAR und SLR Versuchsgruppen und der Metallmatrix für vertikale und gewinkelte Implantate. Bei der Gruppe IAA zeigten sich statistisch bedeutsame Unterschiede für die gewinkelten Implantate. Schlussfolgerung: Innerhalb der Grenzen dieser Studie wurde die Schlussfolgerung getroffen, dass unter Anwendungen der Techniken SAR und SLR genauere Abdrücke erreicht wurden als mit der IAA-Technik, die schlechtere Ergebnisse aufwies.

SCHLÜSSELWÖRTER: Zahnimplantate, Prothetik, Abdruckmaterialien, Abdrucktechniken


AUTOR(ES): Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, DDS, MSc, PhD, Lucas Fernando Tabata, DDS, MSc, Alessandra Cardoso, DDS, Eduardo Passos Rocha, DDS, MSc, PhD, Érica Alves Gomes, DDS, MSc. Correspondencia a: Prof. Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 Vila Mendonça, CEP 16015-050 Araçatuba—SP BRAZIL. Teléfono/Fax: (18)3636-3245, Correo electrónico:[email protected]

Evaluación de la precisión de la impresión para la transferencia prostética para implantes oseointegrados

ABSTRACTO:Propósito: El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar y comparar tres técnicas de impresión para procedimientos de transferencia de implantes oseointegrados. Métodos y Materiales: 1. Grupo SAR, impresión con copings cuadrados ferulizados con una barra de resina acrílica autopolimerizante prefabricada; 2. Grupo SLR, impresión con copings cuadrados ferulizados con una barra de resina de aleación prefabricada de curado con luz; 3. Grupo IAA, impresión con copings cuadrados independientes de óxido de aluminio y abrasión por aire. Los procedimientos de impresión fueron realizados con material de poliéster y los datos obtenidos fueron comparados con un grupo de control. Los mismos fueron caracterizados por valores de medición de la matriz de metal de la inclinación de los implantes a los 90 y 65 grados con relación a la superficie de la matriz. Las lecturas de las inclinaciones de los implantes y análogos fueron evaluadas al azar a través de un programa de computación de gráficos AutoCAD R14. La desviación angular de los grupos experimentales con la matriz de metal fueron presentados para el análisis de la varianza (ANOVA) y las medianas fueron comparadas a través de la prueba de Tukey (p < 0,05). Resultados: No existió una diferencia estadísticamente significativa entre los grupos experimentales SAR y SLR y la matriz de metal para los implantes verticales y angulados. El Grupo IAA presentó una diferencia estadísticamente significativa para los implantes angulados. Conclusión: Se concluyó que dentro de las limitaciones de este estudio, que el SAR y SLR produjo moldes más precisos que la técnica IAA, que presentó resultados inferiores.

PALABRAS CLAVES: implantes dentales, prostodónticas, materiales para impresión, técnicas de impresión.


AUTOR(ES): Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Cirurgião-Dentista, Mestre em Ciência, PhD, Lucas Fernando Tabata, Cirurgião-Dentista, Mestre em Ciência, Alessandra Cardoso, Cirurgiã-Dentista, Eduardo Passos Rocha, Cirurgião-Dentista, Mestre em Ciência, PhD, Érica Alves Gomes, Cirurgiã-Dentista, Mestre em Ciência. Correspondência para: Prof. Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 Vila Mendonça, CEP 16015–050 Araçatuba—SP BRAZIL. Telefone/Fax: (18)3636-3245, E-mail:[email protected]

Avaliação de Precisão da Impressão de Transferência Protética para Implantes Osseointegrados

RESUMO:Objetivo: deste estudo era avaliar e comparar três técnicas de impressão para procedimentos de transferência de implantes osseointegrados. Métodos & Materiais: 1. Grupo SAR, impressão com coroas quadradas esplintadas com barra de acrílico autopolimerizante pré-fabricada; 2. Grupo SLR, impressão com coroas quadradas esplintadas com barra de resina composta levemente tratada pré-fabricada; 3. Grupo IAA, impressão com ar-abrasivo de óxido de alumínio de coroa quadrada independente. Foram realizados procedimentos de impressão com material poliéter e os dados obtidos foram comparados com um grupo de controle. Esses foram caracterizados por valores de medição de matriz de metal das posições de inclinação dos implantes a 90 e 65 graus em relação à superfície da matriz. Leituras de inclinações análogas e de implante foram avaliadas aleatoriamente através do software de computação gráfica AutoCAD R14. O desvio angular de grupos experimentais foi submetido a análise de variância (ANOVA) e as médias foram comparadas através do teste de Tukey (p < 0,05). Resultados: Não houve nenhuma diferença estatística significativa entre os grupos experimentais e de matriz de metal SAR e SLR para implantes verticais e angulados. Conclusão: Concluiu-se dentro das limitações deste estudo que SAR e SLR produziam peças fundidas mais precisas do que a técnica IAA, que apresentou resultados inferiores.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE: implantes dentários, prostodontia, materiais de impressão, técnicas de impressão



АВТОРЫ: Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, доктор стоматологиии, магиистр наук, доктор фиилософиии, Lucas Fernando Tabata, доктор стоматологиии, магиистр наук, Alessandra Cardoso, доктор стоматологиии, Eduardo Passos Rocha, доктор стоматологиии, магиистр наук, доктор фиилософиии, Érica Alves Gomes, доктор стоматологиии, магиистр наук. Адрeс для коррeспондeнциии: Prof. Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 – Vila Mendonça, CEP 16015–050 Araçatuba – SP BRAZIL. Telephone/Fax: (18)3636-3245, E-mail:[email protected]

Оцeнка точностии слeпка прии установкe зубныx протeзов, удeржииваeмыx остeоиинтeгриированнымии иимплантатамии

РEЗЮМE: ЦeлЏapos;: ЦeлЏapos; данного иисслeдованиия – оцeниитЏapos; ии сравниитЏapos; трии мeтодиикии получeниия слeпка прии постановкe остeоиинтeгриированныx иимплантатов. Матeрииалы ии мeтоды: 1. В группe иисслeдуeмыx SAR оцeниивался слeпок с приимeнeнииeм квадратныx вкладок, фииксиируeмыx прии помощии готовой дугии ииз самополиимeриизующeйся акрииловой смолы. 2. В группe иисслeдуeмыx SLR оцeниивался слeпок с приимeнeнииeм квадратныx вкладок, фииксиируeмыx прии помощии готовой дугии ииз свeтоотвeрждаeмой композиициионной пластмассы. 3. В группe иисслeдуeмыx IAA оцeниивался слeпок с приимeнeнииeм нeзавиисиимыx квадратныx вкладок, обработанныx струeй воздуxа с абразиивом на основe окиисии алюмииниия. Процeсс иизготовлeниия слeпка проводиился с приимeнeнииeм полииэфиирного матeрииала, а получeнныe рeзулЏapos;таты сравниивалиисЏapos; с рeзулЏapos;татамии контролЏapos;ной группы. Основным иитоговым показатeлeм было значeнииe отклонeниия иимплантатов на 90 ии 65 градусов, иизмeряeмоe прии помощии мeталлиичeской матриицы, по отношeниию к матриичной повeрxностии. Парамeтры модeлeй ии отклонeниия иимплантатов иизмeрялиисЏapos; мeтодом случайной выборкии прии помощии графиичeского программного обeспeчeниия AutoCAD R14. Угловоe отклонeнииe иимплантатов, иизмeряeмоe прии помощии мeталлиичeской матриицы, в экспeриимeнталЏapos;ныx группаx подвeргалосЏapos; дииспeрсиионному аналиизу (ANOVA), ии затeм проводиилосЏapos; сравнeнииe срeднииx значeниий прии помощии тeста Такии (р<0,05). РeзулЏapos;таты: Мeжду рeзулЏapos;татамии, получeннымии в экспeриимeнталЏapos;ныx группаx SAR ии SLR, а такжe мeжду значeнииямии мeталлиичeской матриицы для вeртиикалЏapos;ныx ии наклонныx иимплантатов значиитeлЏapos;ной статиистиичeской разниицы отмeчeно нe было. РeзулЏapos;таты, получeнныe в группe IAA, показалии значиитeлЏapos;ную статиистиичeскую разниицу мeжду значeнииямии для наклонныx иимплантатов. Вывод: В рамкаx данного иисслeдованиия было установлeно, что мeтоды, приимeнявшииeся прии оцeнкe в группаx SAR ии SLR, давалии болee точныe слeпкии, чeм мeтодиика, приимeнявшаяся в группe IAA, в рeзулЏapos;татe которой былии получeны xудшииe рeзулЏapos;таты.

КЛЮХEВЫE СЛОВА: зубныe иимплантаты, протeзиированииe зубов, слeпочный матeрииал, тexниикии получeниия слeпка.


YAZARLAR: Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, DDS, MSc, PhD, Lucas Fernando Tabata, DDS, MSc, Alessandra Cardoso, DDS, Eduardo Passos Rocha, DDS, MSc, PhD, Érica Alves Gomes, DDS, MSc. Yazışım için: Prof. Wirley Gonçalves Assunção, Rua José Bonifácio, 1193 Vila Mendonça, CEP 16015-050 Araçatuba—SP BREZİLYA. Telefon/Faks: (18)3636-3245, E-posta:[email protected]

Osseoentegrasyonlu İImplantlarda Protez Transfer Ölçüsünün Doğruluğunun Değerlendirmesi

ÖZET:Amaç: Bu çalışma, osseoentegrasyonlu implant transfer prosedürlerinde üç ölçü tekniğinin değerlendirilip karşılaştırılması amacıyla hazırlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: 1. Grup SAR: prefabrike, otopolimerleşen akril reçine çubuk ile splintlenmiş kare üst yapılarla ölçü; 2. Grup SLR: prefabrike, ışıkla sertleşen bileşke reçine çubuk ile splintlenmiş kare üst yapılarla ölçü; 3. Grup IAA: alüminyum oksit hava-aşındırıcı bağımsız kare üst yapı ile ölçü. Ölçü prosedürleri, polieter materyal ile yapılmış ve elde edilen veriler kontrol grubunun verileri ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Bunlar, implantın 90 ve 65 derecede eğim pozisyonunun matris yüzeyine nazaran metal matris ölçü değerleri ile karakterize idi. Analog okumaları ve implant eğimleri, AutoCAD R14 yazılımının grafik hesaplaması ile rasgele bir şekilde değerlendirilmiştir. Deney gruplarının metal matrisle açısal sapması varyans analizi (ANOVA) ile değerlendirilerek ortalamalar Tukey testi ile karşılaştırılmıştır (p < 0.05). Bulgular: SAR ve SLR deney grupları ve metal matris arasında dikey ve açısal implantlarda istatistiksel yönden anlamlı bir farklılık gözlenmemiştir. Buna karşın, IAA Grubu, açısal implantlar yönünden anlamlı bir istatistiksel farklılık göstermiştir. Sonuç: Bu çalışmanın sınırlamaları dahilinde varılan sonuç, SAR ve SLR yöntemlerinin IAA tekniğine nazaran daha doğru bir model sağladığı ve IAA'nın daha düşük sonuçlar verdiği üzerindedir.

ANAHTAR KELİMELER: dental implantlar, prostodontik, ölçü materyalleri, ölçü teknikleri.







dental implants; prosthodontics; impression materials; impression techniques

© 2008 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.