J Adv Prosthodont.  2014 Feb;6(1):66-69. 10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.66.

Implant overdenture impressions using a dynamic impression concept

• Lee BK
• Park SH
• Lee CH
• Cho JH

• KMID: 2176573
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.66

Abstract

A dynamic impression is a functional impression that records the functional movement of the patient's own muscle and muscle attachment. This process reduces the number of random factors. This article describes a method for making a special tray using a dynamic impression concept that was made from provisional dentures used for implant healing. The individual tray is used to make a wash-impression to record the features of the mucosa in detail. The main advantage of this technique is that it provides a functional relationship of the implant components to the supporting tissues without overextension because provisional denture had been used for 2 months and the border length of individual tray was nearly the same as that of provisional denture. The delivery of the prosthesis constructed using this impression technique is time-saving because there is no need for border molding and there are fewer post-insertion appliance adjustments.

Keyword

Implant overdenture; Dynamic impression; Tissue conditioner; Functional impression

MeSH Terms

Denture, Overlay*
Dentures
Fungi
Mucous Membrane
Muscles
Prostheses and Implants

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Initial photo - combination syndrome like appearance; mandibular anterior region was elevated because of no opposing dentition.

• 

  Fig. 2 Initial Panoramic view; severe periodontitis and severe bone resorption on the mandibular molar area.

• 

  Fig. 3 (A) Mandibular alveoloplasty, (B) Four implants were placed on interforamenal area and 3 temporary implants were placed for provisional fixed prosthesis.

• 

  Fig. 4 (A) Tissue conditioning for provisional dentures, (B) The cast was made by pouring improved stone on the tissue conditioner of the impression surface.

• 

  Fig. 5 (A) Block out for implant impression coping and undercut area, (B) Individual tray fabrication and adhesive was pasted.

• 

  Fig. 6 Pick up impression (wash impression concept).

• 

  Fig. 7 Intaglio surface of the cured denture.

• 

  Fig. 8 (A) Denture delivery, (B) Follow up photo (5 years).

Reference

1. Chen IC, Brudvik JS, Mancl LA, Rubenstein JE, Chitswe K, Raigrodski AJ. Freedom of rotation of selected overdenture attachments: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 106:78–86.

2. Uludag B. An alternate pressure-free functional impression technique for implant-retained overdentures. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 36:205–207.

3. Uludag B, Ozturk O, Celik G. Alternate functional impression technique for implant-retained overdentures. J Prosthet Dent. 2007; 97:242–243.

4. Uludag B, Cogalan K, Polat S. An alternative impression technique for implant-retained overdentures with locator attachments. J Oral Implantol. 2010; 36:451–453.

5. Jannesar S, Siadat H, Alikhasi M. A dual impression technique for implant overdentures. J Prosthodont. 2007; 16:327–329.

6. Cho GC, Landesman M, Adomian JG. An alternative altered cast technique for a distal extension removable partial denture. J Calif Dent Assoc. 1997; 25:377–380.

7. Razek MK. Assessment of tissue conditioning materials for functional impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 1979; 42:376–380.

8. McCarthy JA, Moser JB. Tissue conditioners as functional impression materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1978; 5:357–364.

9. Wilson HJ, Tomlin HR, Osborne J. The assessment of temporary soft materials used in prosthetics. Br Dent J. 1969; 126:303–306.

10. Elsyad MA, El-Waseef FA, Al-Mahdy YF, Fouad MM. A comparison of mandibular denture base deformation with different impression techniques for implant overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24:127–133.