Fig. 5. Marginal discrepancy distribution in the open and closed techniques, maxillary mandibular, and anterior and posterior regions
Fig. 4. Normality line of the distribution horizontal measurement data for the intraoral and working casts
Fig. 3. Sample distribution according to arch and position
Fig. 2. Light cure acrylic resin verification jig in the patient’s mouth
Fig. 1. Horizontal measurements between the two impression copings in the patient’s mouth
Marginal discrepancyOpen trayClosed trayP valueMaxilla6 (33.3%)6 (33.3%)0.999Mandible2 (9.1%)6 (27.3%)0.240Anterior2 (15.4%)3 (23.1%)0.50Posterior6 (22.2%)9 (33.3%)0.272Table 6 Chi-square test of marginal discrepancies for the impression techniques, by implant position in the arch
Horizontal discrepanciesPositionNOpen trayClosed trayP valueMeanMedianS.DMeanMedianS. DMaxillaAnterior90.0690.0400.0550.0470.0200.0500.110Posterior90.0980.0400.0930.1010.0500.0900.136Total180.0840.0400.0750.0750.0350.0700.584MandibleAnterior40.0300.0350.0220.0630.0790.0300.999Posterior180.0500.0300.0590.1020.1090.0450.118Total220.04640.040.0540.0950.1040.0400.152Table 5 The horizontal discrepancie...
TechniquesVariablesNumber of impressionsMedianMeanSDP valueOpen trayAnterior130.040.05690.04970.360Posterior270.030.06590.0737Closed trayAnterior130.030.05150.05710.039*Posterior270.040.10260.1013Table 4 Impression technique accuracy in the anterior and posterior regions using the Mann-Whitney U test
TechniquesVariablesNumber of impressionsMedianMeanSDP valueOpen trayMaxilla180.0400.08330.0760.107Mandible220.0300.04640.054Closed trayMaxilla180.0400.07560.0760.419Mandible220.0400.09450.0104Table 3 Open and closed tray technique accuracy in the maxilla and mandible, using the Mann-Whitney U test
TechniquesNumber of impressionsMedianMeanSDP valueOpen tray400.0400.032300.06630.365Closed tray400.0400.04370.918Table 2 Open and closed tray techniques accuracy using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Impression techniqueNMeanStd. deviationStd. error meantP valueIntraoralOpen409.3273.3560.5310.2050.838Closed409.1812.9740.470Master castOpen409.3593.3760.5340.1880.851Closed409.2252.9700.470Table 1 The t test for horizontal measurements of the intraoral and master cast in the open and closed tray techniques
Osman, M., Ziada, H., Suliman, A. et al. A prospective clinical study on implant impression accuracy.
Int J Implant Dent 5, 38 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0190-6
Download citation
Received: 01 April 2019
Accepted: 09 October 2019
Published: 19 November 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0190-6
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were m...
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The ethical principles were adhered to, and ethical approvals to conduct the study were duly obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Ministry of Health, Khartoum State, Khartoum Teaching Dental Hospital, number: [WK/OS/AETEA/44/1].
All authors read and approved the final manuscript and consent to the publication.
Motaz Osman, Hassan Ziada, Ahmed Suliman, and Neamat Abubakr Hassan declare that...
Department of Oral Rehabilitation, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
Motaz Osman
Clinical Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA
Hassan Ziada
Department of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan
Ahmed Suliman
Biomedical Sciences, School of Dental Medicine, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 1001 Sha...
No funding (not applicable).
The authors would like to acknowledge the statistical support provided by Dr. Abdlaal Fadol.
Kim S, Nicholls JI, Han CH, Lee KW. Displacement of implant components from impressions to definitive casts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21:747–55.
Papaspyridakos P, Hirayama H, Chen CJ, Ho CH, Chronopoulos V, Weber HP. Full-arch implant fixed prostheses: a comparative study on the effect of connection type and impression technique on accuracy of fit. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27:10...
Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Bohsali K, Goodacre CJ, Lang BR. Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81:7–13.
Rutkunas V, Ignatovic J. A technique to splint and verify the accuracy of implant impression copings with light-polymerizing acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111:254–6.
Vigolo P, Millstein PL. Evaluation of master cast techniques for multiple a...
Khalifa N, Allen PF, Abu-bakr NH, Abdel-Rahman ME. Factors associated with tooth loss and prosthodontic status among Sudanese adults. J Oral Sci. 2012;54:303–12.
Oliver RC, Brown LJ. Periodontal diseases and tooth loss. Periodontol 2000. 1993;2:117–27.
Hollister MC, Weintraub JA. The association of oral status with systemic health, quality of life, and economic productivity. J Dent Educ. 199...
The authors declare that they have full control on all data and materials of this study.
Within the limitation of this study, there were no differences in the impression accuracy between the open and closed tray techniques, in partially edentulous jaws with two adjacent implants. Also, there were no differences between the two impression techniques regarding marginal discrepancy. The position of the implant, in the maxilla or mandible, had no effect on the impression accuracy of both ...
One of the limitations of our study is the lack of matching arches and regions. This may have yielded variable data and would have perhaps influenced the outcomes of implant impression accuracy. Also, the exact position of the implant in relation to accuracy have not been considered in this study, and further studies should consider evaluating this.
A further limitation is that specialists undert...
Regarding the influence on the accuracy of the implant position within the dental arch, the current study found that the implant position in the dental arch had no influence or impact on impression accuracy, similar to the report by Gallucci et al. [24]. However, and in contrast, Papaspyridakos et al. found that the position in the dental arch influenced accuracy [22]. However, the Papaspyridakos ...
Impression accuracy at the implant level is believed to have a higher degree of accuracy, compared to abutment-level impressions [20]. However, studies reporting on impression accuracy in implant dentistry may vary, and there are several possible explanations for these variations. One reason is the splinting together of copings for pick-up impressions compared to the non-splinting of copings. Seco...
Eighty impressions were made for 40 patients, using the open, then the closed impression techniques. There were 18 impressions in the maxillary and 22 in the mandibular arch; of these, 13 were in the anterior and 27 in the posterior region (Fig. 3).
A t test indicated no statistically significant difference between the open and closed tray techniques for intraoral horizontal measurements again...
Two examiners were involved in the evaluations, and inter-examiner reliability of 0.932 was obtained.
All the data were tabulated and statistically analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics software version 22. The t test was used to compare intraoral and master cast horizontal distances as well as sub-groups of the open and close impression tray techniques. Where data are not normally distributed, Wilc...
There should be accurate imprints of the implant areas.
There should be no voids in the occlusal, buccal, lingual, and interproximal surfaces of the neighboring teeth.
There should be a proper reproduction of the implant area.
There should be no impression material in the analog-impression coping interfaces.
The impression material should not be separated from the custom tray.
The transfer co...
The current study was conducted to investigate the accuracy of the open and closed implant impression techniques in partially edentulous patients with two adjacent implants. The ethical principles were adhered to, and ethical approval to conduct the study was duly obtained from the Ministry of Health, State Khartoum, Khartoum University Teaching Hospital, number: [WK/OS/AETEA/44/1].
Patients who ...
Tooth loss reduces the masticatory ability, compromises esthetics, and may consequently diminish social interactions, which could significantly impact on the quality of life of individuals [1,2,3]. Treatment options for teeth loss are continuously evolving, from the removable prosthesis to the increasing preference for fixed choices. Furthermore, the progress in the manufacturing of titanium impla...