A carregar...
Publicação
Influence of splinting materials (auto vs. photopolymerizing) on implant impression accuracy: an in vitro study
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 65.36 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Purpose: The aim of the present study was to evaluate if there was any significant difference in accuracy between multiple-unit dental implant casts obtained from splinted direct impression techniques using 2 splinting materials by comparing the casts to the reference models. The null hypothesis tested was that the accuracy of implant-impressions was not affected regardless of the splinting material used. Materials and Methods: One master model was fabricated with polyurethane by duplicating an edentulous mandibular arch. Four implant analogs (Biomet 3i®, Florida, USA- external connection) were placed in the intra-mental foramen region, simulating a supra osseous clinical environment and with longitudinal axis parallel to each other. The replicas were numbered anti-clockwise from 1 to 4 based on a frontal view of the master cast. Reference bars machined to fit passively were fabricated using cobalt-chromium alloy. The implant copings were splinted, after the appliance of a matrix of dental floss (ACCLEAN®, Henry Schein®, New York, USA), with CONLIGHT photopolymerizing composite (Conlight; Kuss Dental, Madrid, Spain) (Group A) and GC acrylic resin (GC pattern™; GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan) (Group B), twenty impressions were obtained - ten for each group - in accordance with manufacturer’s directions using a two-step impression technique: Putty - consistency vinyl polysiloxane (Panasil® Putty Soft, Kettenbach®, Eschenburg, Germany) was used as a tray material combinated with light-consistency vinyl polysiloxane (Panasil® Initial Contact Light, Kettenbach®, Eschenburg, Germany). Each cast produced was assessed for accuracy by attaching the respective reference framework with a single screw on analog number 1 and measuring the vertical gap between each cylinder and the respective analog (2, 3 or 4) at four different points - buccal, lingual, distal and mesial – using a toolmaker’s microscope. Results: The results showed there were significant differences between Group A (photopolymerizing composite) and Group B (PMMA autopolymerizing resin), comparing measurements in all analog/ point combinations. It was determined that in Group B the vertical gaps were statistically higher than the ones verified in Group A. vii Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that implant impressions splinted with photopolymerizing composite (Conlight; Kuss Dental, Madrid, Spain) presents better results on the accuracy comparing to implant impressions splinted with PMMA autopolymerizing acrylic resin (GC pattern™; GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan). Implant-level impressions made with PMMA autopolymerizing splinted resin resulted in statistically lower accuracy than the ones made in the photopolymerizing composite group.
Descrição
Tese de mestrado, Medicina Dentária, Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária, 2016
Palavras-chave
Materiais dentários Resinas acrílicas Implantes dentários Teses de mestrado - 2016