The 3-dimensional spatial orientation of intra-oral location of implant fixtures cannot be transferred to the working cast due to movement of impression copings within the impression materials. As a result, an accurate and passive operation is necessary for the long-term success of the implant.
The aim of this in vitro analysis was to see how accurate the master cast was using various splinting and impression materials.
Methodology: A reference mandibular model was created with four internal attachment implants. Using autoplymerizing resin, 36 custom trays were made. The impression material used was polyether and poly vinyl siloxane. The trays were divided into two groups at random, with eighteen trays in each group. Two types of impression techniques were identified: Group I: Open tray impression copings splinted with auto polymerizing acrylic resin in a direct impression technique (GC pattern resin). Community II: Direct impression technique with open tray impression copings splinted with syringable temporization content Pro-temp TM 4 (bis-GMA). As a result, final impressions were created. Using a profile projector, master casts were created and evaluated. These results were compared to those obtained using the reference mandibular model, which was used as a control. A one-way analysis of variance (a=.00) was used to analyse the data, followed by a post hoc Tukey’s test (a=.00).
The ANOVA test and the post-hoc test were used to make statistical comparisons. With resin splinted and bis-GMA splinted impression copings, the same amount of deviation values were obtained. When Polyether and poly vinyl siloxane were used as impression materials, there was a major difference in.
Conclusion: The master cast produced using both splinting materials was identical to the reference model. Polyether performed better in the direct technique in terms of precision. Using both of the impression materials used in the analysis, splinting increased the accuracy of transfer in multiple abutments. Both splinting materials deviated from the reference model in a similar amount, so either one can be selected based on ease of handling, time consumption, technique sensitivity, and availability.
Author (s) Details
Prosthodontist, Civil Hospital Sundernagar, Himachal Pradesh, India.
Prosthodontist, Senior Resident, Institute of Dental Science Seorah, Jammu, India.
Luxmi Bai Dental College, Patiala, India.
SMO Government Hospital Sundernagar, India.
MCM-DAV College, Chandigarh, India.
View Book :- https://stm.bookpi.org/NICST-V10/article/view/593