Comparison of the accuracy of implant digital impression coping
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of impression taking method using the encoded healing abutment, scan body and pick-up impression coping with different implant angulations. Materials and Methods: Master model was fabricated by 3D printer and three implants were placed into the model with 0°, 10° and 20° mesial angulation. The abutments were secured to each implants and master model was scanned to make a reference model. Group P model was fabricated using pick-up impression copings and model was scanned after securing the abutments. Encoded healing abutment (Group E) and scan body (Group S) were secured on the master model and digital impression was taken using intraoral scanner 15 times each. Each STL files of test groups were superimposed with reference model using best fit alignment and root mean square (RMS) value was analyzed. Results: The RMS values were lowest in Group P, followed by Group S and Group E. Group P showed significant difference with Group S and E (P < 0.05) while there was no significant difference between Group S and E. Correlation between implant angulation and RMS value was significant in Group E (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The pick-up impression coping method showed higher accuracy and there was no significant difference in accuracy between the healing abutment and the scan body. The clinical use of the encoded healing abutment is possible, but it should be used with caution in the case of angulated implant. (J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2020;36(1):29-40)
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of impression taking method using the encoded healing abutment, scan body and pick-up impression coping with different implant angulations. Materials and Methods: Master model was fabricated by 3D printer and three implants were placed into the model with 0°, 10° and 20° mesial angulation. The abutments were secured to each implants and master model was scanned to make a reference model. Group P model was fabricated using pick-up impression copings and model was scanned after securing the abutments. Encoded healing abutment (Group E) and scan body (Group S) were secured on the master model and digital impression was taken using intraoral scanner 15 times each. Each STL files of test groups were superimposed with reference model using best fit alignment and root mean square (RMS) value was analyzed. Results: The RMS values were lowest in Group P, followed by Group S and Group E. Group P showed significant difference with Group S and E (P < 0.05) while there was no significant difference between Group S and E. Correlation between implant angulation and RMS value was significant in Group E (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The pick-up impression coping method showed higher accuracy and there was no significant difference in accuracy between the healing abutment and the scan body. The clinical use of the encoded healing abutment is possible, but it should be used with caution in the case of angulated implant. (J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2020;36(1):29-40)
참고문헌 (40)
- Branemark PI, "Tissueintegrated prostheses: Osseointegration in clinical dentistry", pp.611~612 (1985), Quintessence
- Wee AG, "Strategies to achieve fit in implant prosthodontics : a review of the literature", Int J Prosthodont, 12, pp.167~178 (1999)
- Del’Acqua MA, "Accuracy of impression and pouring techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 23, pp.226~236 (2008)
- Del’Acqua MA, "Comparison of impression techniques and materials for an implant-supported prosthesis", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 25, pp.771~776 (2010)
- Wee AG, "Evaluation of the accuracy of solid implant casts", J Prosthodont, 7, pp.161~169 (1998)
- Cabral LM, "Comparative analysis of 4impression techniques for implants", Implant Dent, 16, pp.187~194 (2007)
- Conrad HJ, "Accuracy of two impression techniques with angulated implants", J Prosthet Dent, 97, pp.349~356 (2007)
- Wenz HJ, "Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 23, pp.39~47 (2008)
- Lee H, "The accuracy of implant impressions : a systematic review", J Prosthet Dent, 100, pp.285~291 (2008)
- Assuncao WG, "Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations", Implant Dent, 13, pp.358~366 (2004)
- Christensen GJ, "Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions?", J Am Dent Assoc, 139, pp.761~763 (2008)
- Beuer F, "Digital dentistry : an overview of recent developments for CAD", CAM generated restorations, 2008, pp.204, 505~511
- Ender A, "Full arch scans : conventional versus digital impressions-an in-vitro study", Int J Comput Dent, 14, pp.11~21 (2011)
- Stimmelmayr M, "Digital evaluation of the reproducibility of implant scanbody fit-an in vitro study", Clin Oral Investig, 16, pp.851~856 (2012)
- Abrahamsson I, "The mucosal barrier following abutment dis", reconnection. An experimental study in dogs, 1997, pp.24, 568~572
- Grossmann Y, "A novel technique using a coded healing abutment for the fabrication of a CAD", CAM titanium abutment for an implant-supported restoration, 2006, pp.95, 258~261
- Fuster-Torres MA, "CAD", CAM dental systems in implant dentistry : update, 2009, pp.14, E141~E145
- Kapos T, "Computer-aided design and computerassisted manufacturing in prosthetic implant dentistry", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 24, pp.110~117 (2009)
- Nayyar N, "Using digitally coded healing abutments and an intraoral scanner to fabricate implant-supported, cement-retained restorations", J Prosthet Dent, 109, pp.210~215 (2013)
- Fluegge T, "A novel method to evaluate precision of optical implant impressions with commercial scan bodies-an experimental approach", J Prosthodont, 26, pp.34~41 (2017)
- Ting-Shu S, "Intraoral digital impression technique : a review", J Prosthodont, 24, pp.313~321 (2015)
- Eliasson A, "The accuracy of an implant impression technique using digitally coded healing abutments", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 14(Suppl 1), pp.e30~e38 (2012)
- Ng SD, "Three-dimensional accuracy of a digitally coded healing abutment implant impression system", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 29, pp.927~936 (2014)
- Howell KJ, "Comparison of the accuracy of Biomet 3i Encode robocast technology and conventional implant impression techniques", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 28, pp.228~240 (2013)
- Al-Abdhullah K, "An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations", J Prosthet Dent, 110, pp.90~100 (2013)
- Moura RV, "Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital impression techniques for implant restorations", J Prosthodont, 28, pp.e530~e535 (2019)
- Alexander Hazboun GB, "Effect of implant angulation and impression technique on impressions of NobelActive implants", J Prosthet Dent, 113, pp.425~431 (2015)
- Papaspyridakos P, "Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients : accuracy outcomes", Clin Oral Implants Res, 27, pp.465~472 (2016)
- Filho HG, "Accuracy of impression techniques for implants. Part 2 - comparison of splinting techniques", J Prosthodont, 18, pp.172~176 (2009)
- Amin S, "Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 28, pp.1360~1367 (2017)
- Güth JF, "Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing", Clin Oral Investig, 17, pp.1201~1208 (2013)
- Jemt T, "In vitro measurements of precision of fit of implant-supported frameworks. A comparison between “virtual” and “physical” assessments of fit using two different techniques of measurements", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 14(Suppl 1), pp.e175~e182 (2012)
- Giménez B, "Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 29, pp.853~862 (2014)
- Srinivasan M, "CAD", CAM milled removable complete dentures : an in vitro evaluation of trueness, 2017, pp.21, 2007~2019
- Kim CM, "Trueness of milled prostheses according to number of ball-end mill burs", J Prosthet Dent, 115, pp.624~629 (2016)
- Matta RE, "Accuracy of impression scanning compared with stone casts of implant impressions", J Prosthet Dent, 117, pp.507~512 (2017)
- Abduo J, "The effect of coded healing abutments on treatment duration and clinical outcome : a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing encode and conventional impression protocols", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 32, pp.1172~1179 (2017)
- Mahn DH, "CAD", CAM implant abutments using coded healing abutments : a detailed description of the restorative process, 2013, pp.34, 612~615
- Telleman G, "The use of a coded healing abutment as an impression coping to design and mill an individualized anatomic abutment : a clinical report", J Prosthet Dent, 105, pp.282~285 (2011)
- Dhima M, "Correction of bone and softtissue deformity of the single implant in the aesthetic zone: a case treated with alveolar ridge preservation, modified roll technique and a digitally coded healing abutment", Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 22, pp.51~55 (2014)