Comparison of the accuracy for three dental impression techniques and index: An in vitro study

Abstract

Under the limitations of this study, it could be suggested that a more accurate working cast is possible using tapered impression copings techniques and stone index.

Comparison of direct and indirect occlusal contact examinations with different clenching intensities

“…As the occlusal impression should reproduce the intra‐oral condition precisely, it also suggested that replication of an intra‐oral occlusal contact by dental casts was a more accurate occlusal impression method compared to the conventional impression method. In addition, error of dental cast and silicone bite materials occurred when the clinician applied indirect occlusal examination . Our findings may suggest that direct occlusal contact examination is more reproducible technique as occlusal contact examination in clinical situation.…”

The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant‐supported dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Conventional implant impressions were performed with the open tray method (Akalin et al., ; Aldosari, ; Aldosari et al., ; Amin et al., ; de Avila, de Matos Moraes, Castanharo, Del'Acqua, & de Assis Mollo, ; Bergin et al., ; Beyabanaki, Shamshiri, Alikhasi, & Monzavi, ; Buzayan, Baig, & Yunus, ; Di Fiore et al., ; Ehsani et al., ; Geramipanah, Sahebi, Davari, Hajimahmoudi, & Rakhshan, ; Ghahremanloo et al., ; Ghanem, Nassani, Baroudi, & Abdel Fattah, ; Gupta et al., ; Heidari et al., ; Lin et al., ; Marotti et al., ; Ongül et al., ; Ono et al., ; Papaspyridakos et al., ; Perez‐Davidi et al., ; Pozzi et al., ; Pujari, Garg, & Prithviraj, ; Selvaraj, Dorairaj, Mohan & Simon, ; Vigolo, Mutinelli, Fonzi & Stellini, ; Vojdani, Torabi, & Ansarifard, ; Zen et al., ), the closed tray method (Abdel‐Azim et al., ; Calesini et al., ; Del'acqua, de Avila, Amaral, Pinelli, & de Assis Mollo, ; Gökçen‐Rohlig et al., ; Ibrahim, Fouad, Elewa, & Mustafa, ; Ibrahim & Ghuneim, ; Karl et al., ; Lee et al., ; Reddy, Prasad, Vakil, Jain, & Chowdhary, ) or both the open and closed tray methods for comparison of the accuracy (Al Quran et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, Beyabanaki, & Kharazifard, ; Alikhasi, Siadat, & Rahimian, ; de Avila, Barros, Del'Acqua, Castanharo, & Mollo Fde, ; BalaMurugan & Manimaran, ; Chang, Vahidi, Bae, & Lim, ; Haghi, Shiehzadeh, Nakhaei, Ahrary, & Sabzevari, ; Hazboun, ; Howell et al., ; Karl & Palarie, ; Mpikos et al., ; Nakhaei, Madani, Moraditalab, & Haghi, ; Ng et al., ; Pera et al., ; Rutkunas, Sveikata, & Savickas, ; Sabouhi et al., , ; ...…”

“…Impression materials were polyvinylsiloxane, vinylsiloxanether, polyether or condensation silicone. Polyvinylsiloxane materials were used in 26 studies (Abdel‐Azim et al., ; Al‐Abdullah, Zandparsa, Finkelman, & Hirayama, ; Alikhasi, Siadat, Beyabanaki et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, & Rahimian, ; de Avila et al., , ; BalaMurugan & Manimaran, ; Beyabanaki et al., ; Calesini et al., ; Del'acqua et al., ; Di Fiore et al., ; Ehsani et al., ; Geramipanah et al., ; Ghahremanloo et al., ; Heidari et al., ; Howell et al., ; Ibrahim et al., ; Lee et al., ; Lin et al., ; Marotti et al., ; Nakhaei et al., ; Ono et al., ; Pozzi et al., ; Sabouhi et al., ; Shim et al., ; Siadat et al., ; Zen et al., ), whereas polyether was used in 22 studies (Al Quran et al., ; Aldosari, ; Aldosari et al., ; Alikhasi, Bassir, & Naini, ; Amin et al., ; Ghanem et al., ; Hazboun, ; Ibrahim & Ghuneim, ; Karl et al., ; Martínez‐Rus et al., ; Mpikos et al., ; Ng et al., ; Ongül et al., ; Papaspyridakos et al., ; Pera et al., ; Perez‐Davidi et al., ; Rashidan, Alikhasi, Samadizadeh, Beyabanaki, & Kharazifard, ; Selvaraj et al., ; Stimmelmayr, Erdelt et al., ; Stimmelmayr, Güth et al., ; Tarib et al., ; Tsagkalidis et al., ; Vigolo et al., ), and vinylsiloxanether and condensation silicone were each used in one study (Eliasson & Ortorp, ). Sixteen studies compared any combination of the aforementioned impression materials (Akalin et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, Beyabanaki et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, & Rahimian, ; Buzayan et al., ; Chang et al., …”

“…Thirty‐two studies used nonsplinted impression copings (Akalin et al., ; Aldosari, ; Aldosari et al., ; Alikhasi et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, Beyabanaki et al., ; Alikhasi, Siadat, & Rahimian, ; BalaMurugan & Manimaran, ; Calesini et al., ; Ebadian et al., ; Ehsani et al., ; Eliasson & Ortorp, ; Geramipanah et al., ; Ghahremanloo et al., ; Gökçen‐Rohlig et al., ; Haghi et al., ; Howell et al., ; Ibrahim et al., ; Karl & Palarie, ; Karl et al., ; Lee et al., ; Lin et al., ; Marotti et al., ; Mpikos et al., ; Nakhaei et al., ; Ng et al., ; Rashidan et al., ; Reddy et al., ; Sabouhi et al., ; Shim et al., ; Siadat et al., ; Vojdani et al., ; Wegner et al., ), whereas seven studies used splinted impression copings for open tray impressions (Amin et al., ; Bergin et al., ; Di Fiore et al., ; Gupta et al., ; Ono et al., ; Rutkunas et al., ; Selvaraj et al., ) and one study splinted conical transfer copings for closed tray impressions. Twenty‐five studies compared splinted and nonsplinted impression techniques (Al‐Abdullah et al., ; de Avila et al., , ; Beyabanaki et al., ; Buzayan et al., ; Chang et al., ; Del'acqua et al., ; Ghanem et al., ; Hazboun, ; Heidari et al., ; Ibrahim & Ghuneim, ; Kurtulmus‐Yilmaz et al., ; Martínez‐Rus et al., ; Ongül et al., ; Papaspyridakos et al., ; Pera et al., ; Perez‐Davidi et al., ; Pujari et al., ; Sabouhi et al., ; Shankar et al.,…”

“…Authors used strain gauges to measure the strain in a framework after the placement on implant abutments (BalaMurugan & Manimaran, ; Karl & Palarie, ; Karl et al., ; Zen et al., ). Marginal discrepancy between abutment and framework was measured using microscopes (Abdel‐Azim et al., ; de Avila et al., , ; Del'acqua et al., ; Marotti et al., ; Zen et al., ), optical comparators (Al‐Abdullah et al., ; Pujari et al., ; Reddy et al., ), a surface profilometer (Fernandez et al., ), an electron microscope (Katsoulis et al., ) or standardized photographs (Ono et al., ). The three‐dimensional fit of frameworks was examined by lining of caps and measurement of lining material thickness (Aktas et al., ).…”