| 3082 Evaluation of Osseointegrated Implant Impressions Transfer at Variable Angulations | ||
|
W.G. ASSUNÇÃO1, H. GENNARI FILHO1, and O. ZANIQUELLI2, 1Universidade Est. Paulista Julio Mesquita, Faculty of Dentistry of Araçatuba, Araçatuba, Brazil, 2Universidade de São Paulo, Faculty of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil Introduction: The accuracy of impressions to transfer the relationship between implant and metal framework of the prosthesis remains a problem. Objective: Evaluated the accuracy of the transfer process under variable conditions with regard to implant analog angulations, impression material and techniques. Methods: Replicas (n=60) of a metal matrix (control) contained four implants at 90o, 80o, 75o and 65o in relation to the horizontal surface were obtained by employing three impression techniques, T1 – indirect technique with conical copings in closed trays; T2 – direct technique with square copings in opened trays; and T3 – square copings splinted with auto-polymerizing acrylic resin, and, four elasotmers, “P” - polysulfide; “I” - polyether, “A” - addition silicone; and, “Z” - condensation silicone. The values of the implant analog angulations were assessed by a profilometer at the nearest 0.017o, then, submitted to analysis of variance for comparisons at 5% of significance (p<0.05). Results: For implant analog at 90o, the material “A” associated with T2 and material “Z” with T3 behaved differently (p<0.05) from all groups. At 80o, all materials behaved differently (p<0.01) with T1. At 75o, when T1 was associated, materials “P” and “A” presented similar behavior, as well as materials “I” and “Z”, however, “P” and “A” were different from “I” and “Z” (p<0.01); when T3 was associated, all experimental groups behaved differently among them (p<0.01). At 65o, the materials “P” and “Z” behaved differently (p<0.01) from the control group with T1, T2 and T3; the materials “I” and “A” behaved differently from the control group (p<0.01) when T1 and T2, respectively, was associated. Conclusions: The more perpendicular is the implant analog angulation in relation to the horizontal surface, the more accurate is the impression. The best materials were material “I” and “A” and the most satisfactory technique was the Technique 3. | ||
| Seq #333 - Implant Prosthodontic Research 10:15 AM-11:30 AM, Saturday, 13 March 2004 Hawaii Convention Center Exhibit Hall 1-2 | ||
|
Back to the Prosthodontics Research Program
| ||