AI Article Synopsis

Article Abstract

Obtaining accurate models and well-fitting prostheses during the fabrication of complete implant-supported prostheses has been a significant challenge. Conventional impression methods involve multiple clinical and laboratory steps that can lead to distortions, potentially resulting in inaccurate prostheses. In contrast, digital impressions may eliminate some of these steps, leading to better-fitting prostheses. Therefore, it is important to compare conventional and digital impressions for producing implant-supported prostheses. This study aimed to compare the quality of digital intraoral and conventional impressions by measuring the vertical misfit of implant-supported complete bars obtained using both types of techniques. Five digital impressions using an intraoral scanner and five impressions using elastomer were made in a four-implant master model. The plaster models produced with conventional impressions were scanned in a laboratory scanner to obtain virtual models. Screw-retained bars (n = five) were designed on the models and milled in zirconia. The bars fabricated using digital (DI) and conventional (CI) impressions were screwed to the master model, initially with one screw (DI1 and CI1) and later with four screws (DI4 and CI4), and were analyzed under a SEM to measure the misfit. ANOVA was used to compare the results ( < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the misfit between the bars fabricated using digital and conventional impressions when screwed with one (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. CI1 = 101.90 µm: F = 0.096; = 0.761) or four screws (DI4 = 59.43 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 2.655; = 0.139). Further, there were no differences when the bars were compared within the same group screwed with one or four screws (DI1 = 94.45 µm vs. DI4 = 59.43 µm: F = 2.926; = 0.123; CI1 = 101.90 µm vs. CI4 = 75.62 µm: F = 0.013; = 0.907). It was concluded that both impression techniques produced bars with a satisfactory fit, regardless of whether they were screwed with one or four screws.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10254348PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma16114176DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

digital impressions
16
conventional impressions
16
impressions
9
conventional digital
8
fabrication complete
8
complete implant-supported
8
implant-supported prostheses
8
master model
8
bars fabricated
8
fabricated digital
8

Similar Publications

Aim: The aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate the retention of complete dentures and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients with conventional and bioelectric impressions or transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS).

Materials And Methods: A total of thirty (n = 30) completely edentulous patients were randomly distributed into two groups: Group-C (n = 15) (Conventional) and Group-T (n = 15) (bioelectric). In Group C, border molding was performed using the manual manipulation of borders, and the final impression was made using zinc-oxide eugenol.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Intensive longitudinal sampling enhances subjective data collection by capturing real-time, dynamic inputs in natural settings, complementing traditional methods. This study evaluates the feasibility of using daily self-reported app data to assess clinical improvement among tinnitus patients undergoing treatment. App data from a multi-center randomized clinical trial were analysed using time-series feature extraction and nested cross-validated ordinal regression with elastic net regulation to predict clinical improvement based on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background/purpose: Spacing between teeth is a common trait across different stages of dentition. With the tide of the digital impression, the scanning trueness of the intraoral scanner (IOS) is a hot subject. This study aimed to determine the correlation between the level of the spaced dentition and trueness of the intraoral scanning.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background/purpose: The accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) plays a crucial role in the success of final restorations in digital workflows. Previous studies have shown that numerous factors affect the accuracy of IOSs. Most studies have evaluated the accuracy of IOS under one restoration condition.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

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!