DIGITAL ASSESSMENT OF POSITIONAL ACCURACY OF DIFFERENT SPLINTING MULTIIMPLANT IMPRESSION TECHNIQUES: AN IN VITRO COMPARATIVE STUDY | ||||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 4, Volume 48, Issue 3, December 2023, Page 138-142 PDF (491.78 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2022.150446.1297 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Ahmed Ibrahim Awaad   1; Akram Neena 2; Faten Salah Eldin Abbas3
| ||||
| 1prosthdontics department, faculty of dentistry, alexandria university. | ||||
| 2Assistant lecturer of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University | ||||
| 3Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| ABSTRACT Background: Splinting of multiple implants during impression with the most accurate material to reproduce their intraoral relationship is deemed necessary for achieving passively fitting prosthesis. Aim of the study: To assess positional accuracy of multiimplant impressions for completely edentulous arches obtained by a 3D printed splint and compare the results obtained with those obtained with conventional methods. Material and methods: One mandibular epoxy model with 4 parallel implants was used as master reference model. A total of 24 (n=24) open tray impressions were done using a custom-made tray and were poured in dental stone. Eight impressions were done with 3D printed splint (group I), 8 were done with the conventional splinting method (group II), and 8 were done with sectional splinting method (group III). Four impression posts were attached to each cast, and all casts were scanned using a desktop scanner. Surface scans for the 3 groups were superimposed with the scan of the master reference model. The positional accuracy of each post was compared with the reference model to assess positional deviations. Results: Models of group I showed lower positional deviation compared to other groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the 3 impression techniques regarding positional accuracy of the implants. Conclusion: 3D printed splint method can be used as an alternative to conventional splinting techniques. Keywords: Multiimplant impression; Splinting technique; 3D printed splint. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Multi-implant impression; Splinting technique; 3D splint | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 151 PDF Download: 284 |
||||
