Volume 26, Issue 4 (10-2013)                   jdm 2013, 26(4): 243-250 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Alikhasi M, Siadat H, Beyabanaki E. Accuracy of implant transfer and surface detail reproduction with polyether and polyvinyl siloxane using closed-tray impression technique. jdm. 2013; 26 (4) :243-250
URL: http://jdm.tums.ac.ir/article-1-5092-en.html
Abstract:   (25802 Views)

  Background and Aims: Making accurate impressions of prepared teeth when they are adjacent to dental implants is of great importance. In these situations, disregarding the selection of appropriate impression material and technique, not only can affect accuracy of transferring of the 3-dimentional spatial status of implant, but also can jeopardize the accurate recording of tooth. In the present study, the accuracy of two impression materials with taper impression copings for recording implant position and surface details was evaluated.

  Materials and Methods: One metal reference model with 2 implants (Implantium) and a preparation of three grooves on a tooth according to ADA no. 19 standard was fabricated. 10 medium- consistency polyEther (PE) impressions using custom trays and 10 polyVinyl Siloxane (PVS) putty wash impressions using prefabricated trays with conical impression coping were made. Impressions were poured with ADA type IV stone. A Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) evaluated x, y and angular displacement of the implant analog heads and also accuracy of groove reproduction were measured using a Video Measuring Machine (VMM). These measurements were compared to the ones from reference model. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and T-test.

  Results: Putty wash PVS had less linear discrepancy compared with reference model (P > 0.001). There was no significant difference in the surface detail reproduction (P = 0.15).

  Conclusion: Putty wash PVS had better results for linear displacement compared with medium consistency PE. There was no significant difference in surface detail reproduction between the two impression materials.

Full-Text [PDF 347 kb]   (1987 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: general
Received: 2013/04/1 | Accepted: 2013/11/26 | Published: 2013/12/15

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


© 2021 All Rights Reserved | Journal of Dental Medicine

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb