J Adv Prosthodont.  2010 Mar;2(1):25-31. 10.4047/jap.2010.2.1.25.

Accuracy of a proposed implant impression technique using abutments and metal framework

• Lee HJ
• Lim YJ
• Kim CW
• Choi JH
• Kim MJ

• KMID: 1975174
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2010.2.1.25

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study compared the accuracy of an abutment-framework (A-F) taken with open tray impression technique combining cementon crown abutments, a metal framework and resin cement to closed tray and resin-splinted open tray impression techniques for the 3-implant definitive casts. The effect of angulation on the accuracy of these 3 techniques was also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three definitive casts, each with 3 linearly positioned implant analogs at relative angulations 0, 30, and 40 degrees, were fabricated with passively fitted corresponding reference frameworks. Ten impressions were made and poured, using each of the 3 techniques on each of the 3 definitive casts. To record the vertical gap between reference frameworks and analogs in duplicate casts, a light microscope with image processing was used. Data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test.
RESULTS
The open tray techniques showed significantly smaller vertical gaps compare to closed tray technique (P < .05). The closed tray and the resin-splinted open tray technique showed significantly different vertical gaps according to the angulation of implant (P < .05), but the A-F impression technique did not (P > .05).
CONCLUSION
The accuracy of the A-F impression technique was superior to that of conventional techniques, and was not affected by the angulation of the implants.

Keyword

Implant; Abutment; Metal framework; Vertical gap; Angulation

MeSH Terms

Crowns
Light
Resin Cements
Resin Cements

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Reference frameworks were waxed and cast on preliminary casts. Top: 0 degree, middle: 30 degrees, bottom: 40 degrees.

• 

  Fig. 2 Definitive casts with guide pins connected to show the angulation of the implant analogs. Top: parallel, middle: 30 degrees, bottom: 40 degrees.

• 

  Fig. 3 Impression procedures performed on the definitive cast and the soft tissue cast. A: Closed tray impression copings on the 0 degree definitive cast, B: Resin splint of open tray impression copings was sectioned on the 30 degrees definitive cast, C: A-F impression. Soft tissue cast and abutments were connected to the 30 degrees definitive cast, D: A-F impression. Assembly of abutments and metal framework on the 40 degrees definitive cast.

• 

  Fig. 4 Image of the vertical gap between the UCLA abutment of the reference framework and the implant analog of the experimental definitive cast.

• 

  Fig. 5 Schematic drawings of the position and direction of measurement for statistical analysis. The arrows represent the screw tightening position and the round arrows represent measurement positions. A: Screw tightening of center analog and measurement of outer analogs, B: Screw tightening of left analog and measurement of right analog; screw tightening of right analog and measurement of left analog.

Reference

1. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PL. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg. 1981. 10:387–416.

2. Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 1983. 49:843–848.

3. 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.

4. Naconecy MM, Teixeira ER, Shinkai RS, Frasca LC, Cervieri A. Evaluation of accuracy of 3 transfer techniques for implant-supported prostheses with multiple abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004. 19:192–198.

5. Assif D, Fenton A, Zarb G, Schmitt A. Comparative accuracy of implant impression procedures. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1992. 12:112–121.

6. Assif D, Marshak B, Schmidt A. Accuracy of implant impression techniques. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996. 11:216–222.

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. Vigolo P, Fonzi F, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2004. 92:470–476.

9. Assif D, Nissan J, Varsano I, Singer A. Accuracy of implant impression splinted techniques: effect of splinting material. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999. 14:885–888.

10. Fenton A, Assif D, Zarb G, Schmitt A. The accuracy of implant impression procedures. J Dent Res. 1991. 70:396–399.

11. Herbst D, Nel JC, Driessen CH, Becker PJ. Evaluation of impression accuracy for osseointegrated implant supported superstructures. J Prosthet Dent. 2000. 83:555–561.

12. Hsu CC, Millstein PL, Stein RS. A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant transfer techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1993. 69:588–593.

13. De La Cruz JE, Funkenbusch PD, Ercoli C, Moss ME, Graser GN, Tallents RH. Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2002. 88:329–336.

14. Burawi G, Houston F, Byrne D, Claffey N. A comparison of the dimensional accuracy of the splinted and unsplinted impression techniques for the Bone-Lock implant system. J Prosthet Dent. 1997. 77:68–75.

15. Inturregui JA, Aquilino SA, Ryther JS, Lund PS. Evaluation of three impression techniques for osseointegrated oral implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1993. 69:503–509.

16. Conrad HJ, Pesun IJ, DeLong R, Hodges JS. Accuracy of two impression techniques with angulated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2007. 97:349–356.

17. Carr AB. Comparison of impression techniques for a two-implant 15-degree divergent model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1992. 7:468–475.

18. Carr AB. A comparison of impression techniques for a fiveimplant mandibular model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991. 6:448–455.

19. Phillips KM, Nicholls JI, Ma T, Rubenstein J. The accuracy of three implant impression techniques: A three-dimensional analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994. 9:533–540.

20. Choi JH, Lim YJ, Lim SH, Kim CW. Evaluation of the accuracy of implant-level impression techniques for internal-connection implant prostheses in parallel and divergent models. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007. 22:761–768.

21. Assuncao WG, Filho HG, Zaniquelli O. Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations. Implant Dentistry. 2004. 13:358–364.

22. Vigolo P, Fonzi F, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. Master cast accuracy in single-tooth implant replacement cases: an in vitro comparison. A technical note. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005. 20:455–460.

23. Clelland NL, van Putten MC. Comparison of strains produced in a bone simulant between conventional cast and resin-luted implant frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997. 12:793–799.