IADR Abstract Archives

The Accuracy of Open-Tray vs. Snap on Impression Techniques on a 6-Implant Model- an in Vitro 3D Study

Objectives: The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the three-dimensional accuracy of three impression transfer techniques – snap-on, connected snap-on and open-tray. The following impression transfer techniques were evaluated and compared: snap-on impression (SpO), connected snap-on impression (SpOC) and open-tray direct impression (DI).
Methods: An acrylic resin model of the maxilla with 6 implants was fabricated as a reference model. Geometrical prominent triangles were made in the palate area as reference points for digital overlap between scans. Thirty impressions (n=10 for each impression technique) were taken using polyether impression material. The master model and all casts were digitally scanned with a laboratory optical scanner using scan abutments. The obtained 3D data was converted and recorded as STL files, which were imported to a 3D inspection software program. Angular deviations (buccal, occlusal, interproximal planes) between the reference model and the study casts were measured. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test analyzed the data using 0.05 as the level of significance.
Results: No significant differences were found in the 3D angular deviations between the master model and the DI and SpO impression groups, while in the SpOC impression group, significant differences were shown, especially, in the buccal, and occlusal planes. In all groups, the 3D angular deviation between the most distal scan abutment on each side of the model, was significantly different from all other areas, when compared to the master model.
Conclusions: Within the limits of this in-vitro study, it is possible to assume that: 1. The DI and the SpO impression techniques exhibit the same three-dimensional accuracy. 2. The SpOC impression technique is less accurate then the DI and the SpO impression techniques. 3. Full arch implant supported prosthesis might have inaccuracies between the most distally implants.

2021 Israeli Division Meeting (Jerusalem, Israel)

2021

  • Levartovsky, Shifra  ( Tel-Aviv University George S Wise Faculty of Life Sciences , Tel Aviv , Israel )
  • Masri, Mahmoud  ( Tel-Aviv University George S Wise Faculty of Life Sciences , Tel Aviv , Israel )
  • Adawi, Maram  ( Tel-Aviv University George S Wise Faculty of Life Sciences , Tel Aviv , Israel )
  • Arieli, Adi  ( Tel-Aviv University George S Wise Faculty of Life Sciences , Tel Aviv , Israel )
  • None
    Oral Session
    Oral Session 7