Abstract
Abstract
Background
This clinical study aims to evaluate the accuracy of the conventional implant impression techniques compared to the digital impression ones in bilateral distal extension cases.
Methods
A total of 32 implants were placed in eight patients missing all mandibular posterior teeth except the first premolars. Each patient received a total of four implants, with two implants placed on each side, in order to provide support for three units of screw-retained zirconia restorations. Following osteointegration, the same patient underwent two implant-level impression techniques: Conventional open-tray impressions CII (splinted pick-up) and digital implant impressions DII with TRIOS 3 Shape intraoral scanner. The accuracy of impressions was evaluated utilizing a three-dimensional superimposition analysis of standard tessellation language (STL) files. Subsequently, the scan bodies were segmented using Gom inspect software to measure three-dimensional deviations in a color-coding map. Data were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal Wallis test and then a post-hoc test to determine the significance level (P < 0.05).
Results
The study revealed that higher angular and positional deviations were shown toward distal scan bodies compared to mesial ones for both impression techniques. However, this difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusion
Splinted open-tray conventional impression and intraoral scanning implant impression techniques have demonstrated comparable accuracy.
Trial registration
Clinical Trials.gov Registration: ID: NCT05912725.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference33 articles.
1. Dental implants in the elderly population: a systematic review and meta-analysis;Srinivasan M;Clin Oral Implants Res,2017
2. Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses;França DG;J prosthet Dent,2015
3. Effect of intraoral scanning on the passivity of fit of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses;Karl M;Quintessence Int,2012
4. Clinical accuracy outcomes of closed-tray and open-tray implant impression techniques for partially edentulous patients;Gallucci GO;Int J Prosthodont,2011
5. A comparative clinical study on the transfer accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions using a new reference key-based method;Schmidt A;Clin Oral Implants Res,2021