İmplant Destekli Tam Ark Tek Parça Üst Yapı Üretiminde Ağıziçi Dijital Ölçü Yönteminin Değerlendirilmesi

View/ Open
Date
2017-06-30Author
Varol, Merve
xmlui.mirage2.itemSummaryView.MetaData
Show full item recordAbstract
In recent years, direct digital impression (direct-dI) technique has been evolved into
implant supported fixed partial dentures. However, knowledge with regards to use of
the same technology for edentulous arches is insufficient. The aim of this study,
therefore, was to compare positional accuracy of implants recorded with
conventional impression (cI) and direct-dI techniques. For this purpose, four
implants, two straight anterior and two angulated posterior, supporting fixed full-arch
screw retained prosthesis in rehabilitation of maxillary edentulism was studied. In
simulation of the described clinical scenario, a solid master model was used in
impression making of dental implants with conventional and digital techniques. For
cI group, implants were recorded with open- and closed-tray approach using
elastomeric impression material, and followed by study cast model production with
dental stone. For direct-dI group, different scan-posts, original and non-original
approach, were digitalized using an intraoral scanner. From these data study digital
models were designed, and 3D printed with additive manufacturing. Implant
positions in all study cast- and digital- models were recorded manually and visually
in three dimension using co-ordinate measuring machine (CMM) and laser scanning
machine (LSM) respectively. Implant positions were compared between impression
techniques and within each impression approach as well. Except for posterior
angulated implants recorded with cI and direct-dI, differences for all implant
positions in angular measurements with CMM between impression techniques and
within impression approach were statistically insignificant. All implant positions in
linear measurements displayed statistically insignificant difference. LSM implant
angulation data were statistically different for anterior straight implants between cI
and direct-DI techniques, and within direct-dI technique for original versus nonoriginal
scan posts approach. All other measurements presented insignificant
differences both between impression techniques and within impression approaches.
direct-dI technique using an intraoral scanner in fabrication of full-arch implant
supported fixed restoration is promising due to similar implant position recordings
compared to cI technique. Furthermore, use of non-original scan posts may be
considered as an alternate to originals. In conclusion direct-dI technique can be
accepted as a valid concept in recording of implant positions with different
angulations to support full arch one-piece screw retained implant superstructures