Clinical and Experimental Dental Research (Jun 2023)

Accuracy of tooth‐implant impressions: Comparison of five different techniques

  • Amirhossein Fathi,
  • Mansour Rismanchian,
  • Atousa Yazdekhasti,
  • Masih Salamati

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.737
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 3
pp. 526 – 534

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Purpose To compare the accuracy of five different tooth‐implant impression techniques. Materials and Methods In this in vitro, experimental study, an acrylic model containing one bone‐level Straumann dental implant at the site of maxillary first molar and an adjacent second premolar prepared for a porcelain fused to metal restoration was used. Impressions were made from the model using five different one‐step tooth‐implant impression techniques including scanning with an intraoral scanner, occlusal matrix, wax relief, closed‐tray, and open‐tray techniques. Each technique was repeated 15 times. The impressions were poured with dental stone, and the obtained casts were scanned by a laboratory scanner. The scan file of each technique was compared with the scan file of the original acrylic model by Geomagic Design X software. Data were analyzed by one‐way analysis of variance, and Tamhane's post‐hoc test (α = 0.05). Results For dental implant, intraoral scanning had the highest accuracy (0.1004 mm2) followed by open‐tray (0.1914 mm2), occlusal matrix (0.2101 mm2), closed‐tray (0.2422 mm2), and wax relief (0.2585 mm2) techniques (p 0.05). Conclusion The compared simultaneous tooth‐implant impression techniques had comparable accuracy with no significant difference.

Keywords