• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.265-270
• /
• 2018

PURPOSE. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new implant impression technique using bite impression coping and a dual arch tray. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two implant fixtures were placed on maxillary left second premolar and first molar area in dentoform model. The model with two fixtures was used as the reference. The impression was divided into 2 groups, n=10 each. In group 1, heavy/light body silicone impression was made with pick up impression copings and open tray. In group 2, putty/light body silicone impression was made with bite impression copings and dual arch tray. The reference model and the master casts with implant scan bodies were scanned by a laboratory scanner. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from test groups was superimposed with STL dataset of reference model using inspection software. The three-dimensional deviation between the reference model and impression models was calculated and illustrated as a color-map. Data was analyzed by independent samples T-test of variance at ${\alpha}=.05$. RESULTS. The mean 3D implant deviations of pick up impression group (group 1) and dual arch impression group (group 2) were 0.029 mm and 0.034 mm, respectively. The difference in 3D deviations between groups 1 and 2 was not statistically significant (P=.075). CONCLUSION. Within limitations of this study, the accuracy of implant impression using a bite impression coping and dual arch tray is comparable to that of conventional pick-up impression.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.223-229
• /
• 2017

Closed mouth impression technique by using bite tray is preferred for single tooth impression taking. However, for implant impression taking, open mouth impression technique by using single arch tray is generally used whether it is for single implant or multiple implant. Closed mouth impression technique by using bite tray can save time and materials. It also decreases the chance of error occurrence when a model is mounted on an articulator. In this case report, we tried to show a satisfying result of fabricating single implant fixed prosthodontics after bite tray impression taking by using two different copings for closed mouth impression.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.2 no.4
• /
• pp.128-133
• /
• 2010

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the implant master cast according to the type (pick-up, transfer) and the length (long, short) of the impression copings. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The metal master cast was fabricated with three internal connection type implant analogs (Osstem GS III analog), embedded parallel and with $10^{\circ}$ of mesial angulation to the center analog. Four types of impression coping were prepared with different combinations of types (transfer, pick-up) and lengths (long, short) of the coping. The impressions were made using vinyl polysiloxane (one step, heavy + light body) with an individual tray, and 10 impressions were made for each group. Eventually, 40 experimental casts were produced. Then, the difference in the distance between the master cast and the experimental cast were measured, and the error rate was determined. The analysis of variance was performed using the SPSS (v 12.0) program (${\alpha}$= .05), and the statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS. The ANOVA showed that the pick-up type impression coping exhibited a significantly lower error rate than the transfer type. However, no significant difference was observed with respect to the length of the impression coping. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the parallel and mesial angulated groups. CONCLUSION. Within the limitations of this study, the pick-up type impression coping exhibited a more accurate implant master cast than the transfer type in parallel group. The accuracy of the implant master cast did not differ for different lengths of impression coping of at least 11 mm. Additionally, the accuracy of the implant cast was not different for the parallel and $10^{\circ}$ mesial angulated groups.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.236-249
• /
• 2022

PURPOSE. The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical scanner TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Conventional impressions were taken with the monophase impression material based on addition-cured silicones, Honigum-Mono (DMG, Hamburg, Germany). A high-precision laboratory scanner D900 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) was used to obtain digital data of resin models and stone casts. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from scanner were imported into the analysis software Geomagic Qualify 14 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), and scan body deviations were determined through two-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses. Each scan body was measured five times. The Sidak t test was used to analyze the experimental data. RESULTS. Implant position and scanning distance affected the impression accuracy. For a unilateral arch implant and the mandible models with two implants, no significant difference was observed in the accuracy between the digital and conventional implant impressions on scan bodies; however, the corresponding differences for trans-arch implants and mandible with six implants were extremely significant (P<.001). CONCLUSION. For short-span scanning, the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions did not differ significantly. For long-span scanning, the precision of digital impressions was significantly inferior to that of the traditional impressions.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.445-454
• /
• 1994

Osseointegrated implant prostheses are to provide normal function without compromising the unique interaction between the tissue and the implant. The essential requirement for the osseointegrated implant prostheses is passive fit of abutment. Therefore, the impression must be accurate and reproduciable since the resultant master cast precisely duplicates the clinical condition. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the master casts obtained from five impression techniques. Group 1 : To take impression with indirect technique and Impregum F. Group 2 : To take impression with unsplinted direct technique and Impregum F. Group 3 : To take impression with splinted direct technique and Impregum F. Group 4 : To take impression with unsplinted direct technique and Xanthano. Group 5 : To take impression with splinted dierct technique and Xanthano. The results were as follow : 1. In taking impression of Impregum F, there was no significant difference between to use of indirect technique and unsplinted direct technique.(p<0.05) 2. Unsplinted direct technique with Impregum F is less accurate than splinted direct technique with Impregum F or Xanthano and unsplinted direct technique with Xanthano.(p<0.05). 3. There was no significant difference between splinted direct technique with Impregum F and unsplinted direct technique with Xanthano.(p<0.05) 4. Splinted direct technique reproduce more accurate than unsplinted direct technique.(p<0.05) 5. Impression plaster produced less distortion than polyether.(p<0.05) As a result, splinted direct technique with Xanthano was the most accurate technique. As a result, splinted direct technique with Xanthano was the most accurate technique in this study. In addition to dimensinal changes in the materials used, positional errors were also attributed to the mechanical components used in the transfer porocess. Although the errors measured were relatively small, this study demonstrates the potential for distortions with the transfer technique used. Further study is indicated that ?the technique will be able to reproduce the intraoral relationship of implant fixtures reliably and predictably.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.539-549
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of 3 implant impression methods by using strain gauge. The models used for this study were partially edentulous mandibular acrylic resin casts Model A, with two abutment analogs in #46,47 extraction site, represented two implant parallel to to the adjacent natural tooth. Model B represent an anterior implant parallel to the adjacene natural tooth and a posterior implant exhibiting a 15-degree lingual inclination. Master framework were fabricated on the master model, and 3 strain gauges were attached to a master framwork to determine the passivity of fit of the framework to sample casts made by the three impression techniques. The master framework was attached to each sample cast with gold screws, which were tightened with the torque driver to ensure a consistent toque application of 10 Ncm. Universal Digital Measuring System UCAM-5BT was used for strain measuring. Impression techniques studid were : 1. unsplinted tapered impression coping, polyvinyl siloxane, stock tray 2. unsplinted squared impression coping, polyether, custom tray 3. squared impression coping splinted with Duralay resin, polyether, custom tray Through analysis on data from this study, the following conclusions were obtained. 1. There were no statistically significant differences between the mean strain recorded from the sample casts made with the tree impression. But only strain values of model A(parallel group) Y-axis was signifcantly differed between Technique 1 and 3(P<0.05). 2. There was no statistically significant difference between model A(parallel group) and model B(15-degree divergent group).

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.66-70
• /
• 2014

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.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.234-243
• /
• 2015

Developing of digital technique, it is possible to fabricate implant prostheses for edentulous area using intraoral 3-dimentional information throughout implant diagnosis and treatment process. It is being changed that from the method using CAD/CAM, producing prostheses by model scanning after conventional impression and model processing, to the method of fabricating implant provisional restorations and customized abutments by digital impression after connecting digital impression copings (scanbody) and implant fixtures without models. But, this digital method has not been actively used for implant prostheses not yet. Specially, it is short of intraoral digital impression cases for immediate provisional restorations of the maxillary anterior implants. The gingival contour impression of maxillary anterior area is very important for esthetic restorations. Accordingly, in this case report, the using a digital impression coping (scanbody) and digital impression by CEREC Omnicam (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) or Trios (3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) were introduced for immediate provisional restorations in 3 cases needed a single implant restoration in maxillary anterior area. The clinical results were satisfactory on the convenience and accuracy of digital impression technique and the good esthetics of final restorations.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.11 no.5
• /
• pp.271-279
• /
• 2019

PURPOSE. The newest technologies for digital implant impression (DII) taking are developing rapidly and showing acceptable clinical results. However, scientific literature is lacking data from clinical studies about the accuracy of DII. The aim of this study was to compare digital and conventional dental implant impressions (CII) in a clinical environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty-four fixed zirconia restorations supported by 2 implants were fabricated using conventional open-tray impression technique with splinted transfers (CII group) and scan with Trios 3 IOS (3Shape) (DII group). After multiple verification procedures, master models were scanned using laboratory scanner D800 (3Shape). 3D models from conventional and digital workflow were imported to reverse engineering software and superimposed with high resolution 3D CAD models of scan bodies. Distance between center points, angulation, rotation, vertical shift, and surface mismatch of the scan bodies were measured and compared between conventional and digital impressions. RESULTS. Statistically significant differences were found for: a) inter-implant distance, b) rotation, c) vertical shift, and d) surface mismatch differences, comparing DII and CII groups for mesial and distal implant scan bodies ($P{\leq}.05$). CONCLUSION. Recorded linear differences between digital and conventional impressions were of limited clinical significance with two implant-supported restorations.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.238-247
• /
• 2004

Statement of problem: Major objective in making on implant-supported prosthesis is the production of superstructure that exhibits a passive fit when connected to multiple abutments. One requirement to ensure passive fit is to make an accurate impression. Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of master cast fabricated by using different impression methods at the different impression levels. Material and method: The master model used in this study was resin block having low implant analogs. Impression method studied were 1) direct method on fxiture level (Group FIX-D), 2) indirect method on fixture level(Group FIX-I), 3) modified indirect method on fixture level(Group FIX-M), 4) direct method on abutment level(Group AB-D) and 5) indirect method on abutment level(Group AB-I). Each of the five groups took 10 impressions. Fifty impressions were made for master cast by using Impregum $F^{(R)}$ impression material loaded on individual tray. Three dimensional measuring microscope was used to measure the inter-implant distance. Error rate of each inter-implant distance were calculated and evaluated. Results : The results were as follows. 1. Group FIX exhibited higher accuracy than group AB. 2. In group FIX, modified indirect method showed the highest accuracy, while indirect method showed the lowest accuracy. In group Ab, indirect method showed the higher accuracy than direct method. 3. Group FIX showed larger horizontal error than group AB. But, group AB showed the larger vertical error than group FIX. 4. Group Fix-M showed smallest vertical and horizontal error. Conclusion: An impression method have more effect on accuracy of master model than an impression level. A modified indirect method showed smallest vertical and horizontal error.