Purpose This study investigates the accuracy of abutment transfer with current impression materials and provides a concise overview, including other relevant factors, in order to enable clinicians to make an informed decision about the optimal impression for this treatment procedure. Methods In all, 96 impressions of a cadaver head with two orthodontic miniscrews in place were taken with four common impression materials by two observers and using two methods of application. After pouring with a standard type IV stone and abutment transfer, all models and the upper jaw (which had been separated from the head) were scanned in a standard model scanner (Zirkonzahn® [Zirkohnzahn GmbH, Gais, Italy] S600 ARTI) and evaluated using a computer-aided design (CAD) program (GOM-Inspect [Gesellschaft für optische Messtechnik m.b.H., Braunschweig, Germany]). The deviations were measured at six points per screw and statistically evaluated with SPSS® (IBM, Chicago, IL, USA). Results Optimal values were obtained with biphasic polyvinylsiloxane, while monophasic polyvinylsiloxane, alginate and polyether also resulted in acceptable accuracy. Observer experience showed no effect and the method of application had only a minor effect on accuracy. Conclusions Within the limitations of this study, it seems that all impression materials are suitable for miniscrew abutment transfer, provided that methods of intraoral adaptation of the orthodontic appliance can be employed. If higher accuracy is needed or for clinicians with less experienced, a biphasic polyvinylsiloxane impression with the putty-wash technique should be used as this combination reduces setting time. The most cost-effective version, alginate, can be used if the consequences of greater deviations can be handled. Caution is advised with polyether if undercuts are present.
ZusammenfassungZahnfehlanlagen treten bei Patienten mit Lippen-Kiefer-Gaumenspalten (LKG-Spalten) vermehrt und speziell im Bereich der lateralen Schneidezähne auf. Ziel der vorliegenden retrospektiven Studie war es, die Patienten mit LKG-Spalten, die an der Universitätsklinik Innsbruck in Behandlung sind, auf Zahn-Anomalien zu untersuchen. Nach Anwendung der Ausschlusskriterien wurden 86 Patienten in die Studie einbezogen und in 4 Gruppen eingeteilt: unilaterale LKG-Spalten links (ULCLP), unilaterale LKG-Spalten rechts (URCLP), bilaterale LKG-Spalten (BCLP) und reine Gaumenspalten (CP). Alle Panoramaröntgenaufnahmen bzw. wenn vorhanden DVT oder CT sowie intraorale Fotos wurden auf Nichtanlagen sowie überzählige und dysmorphe Zähne untersucht. In den Gruppen ULCLP und BCLP war bei 50% bzw. 56,5% der Patienten zumindest ein Zahn im Spaltbereich nicht angelegt, während in der Gruppe URCLP durch die geringe Patientenzahl keine bedeutsame Aussage getroffen werden konnte. Außerhalb des Spaltbereichs war bei durchschnittlich 33,7% der Patienten zumindest ein Zahn nicht angelegt, wobei vor allem die zweiten Prämolaren betroffen waren.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.