Background: The difficulty in obtaining an acceptable impression increases exponentially as the number of abutments increases. Accuracy of the impression material and the use of a suitable impression technique are of utmost importance in the fabrication of a fixed partial denture. This study compared the accuracy of the matrix impression system with conventional putty reline and multiple mix technique for individual dies by comparing the inter-abutment distance in the casts obtained from the impressions.

Materials And Methods: Three groups, 10 impressions each with three impression techniques (matrix impression system, putty reline technique and multiple mix technique) were made of a master die. Typodont teeth were embedded in a maxillary frasaco model base. The left first premolar was removed to create a three-unit fixed partial denture situation and the left canine and second premolar were prepared conservatively, and hatch marks were made on the abutment teeth. The final casts obtained from the impressions were examined under a profile projector and the inter-abutment distance was calculated for all the casts and compared.

Results: The results from this study showed that in the mesiodistal dimensions the percentage deviation from master model in Group I was 0.1 and 0.2, in Group II was 0.9 and 0.3, and Group III was 1.6 and 1.5, respectively. In the labio-palatal dimensions the percentage deviation from master model in Group I was 0.01 and 0.4, Group II was 1.9 and 1.3, and Group III was 2.2 and 2.0, respectively. In the cervico-incisal dimensions the percentage deviation from the master model in Group I was 1.1 and 0.2, Group II was 3.9 and 1.7, and Group III was 1.9 and 3.0, respectively. In the inter-abutment dimension of dies, percentage deviation from master model in Group I was 0.1, Group II was 0.6, and Group III was 1.0.

Conclusion: The matrix impression system showed more accuracy of reproduction for individual dies when compared with putty reline technique and multiple mix technique in all the three directions, as well as the inter-abutment distance.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4479773PMC

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

group group
28
matrix impression
16
impression system
16
putty reline
16
multiple mix
16
mix technique
16
percentage deviation
16
deviation master
16
master model
16
model group
16

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!