The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Three Different Impression Materials Using Three Different Techniques for Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Study

Shabab A Khan, Nudrat Neyaz, Mishan Mohohar Jaiswal, Aditi S Tanwar, Amitu Singh

Keywords : Dimensional accuracy, Impression materials, Impression techniques

Citation Information : Khan SA, Neyaz N, Jaiswal MM, Tanwar AS, Singh A. Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Three Different Impression Materials Using Three Different Techniques for Implant Impressions: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (2):172-178.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3014

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-12-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Aim: To compare the dimensional accuracy of polyether, polyvinyl siloxane, and polyether polyvinyl siloxane hybrid impression materials using closed tray, open tray splinted, and open tray nonsplinted coping impression techniques and to find out the best suitable impression material and technique combination for implant impressions. Materials and methods: The sample size of the study was 45. The combinations of materials and techniques were divided into nine groups, namely polyvinyl siloxane with closed tray, polyvinyl siloxane with open tray nonsplinted copings, polyvinyl siloxane with open tray splinted copings, polyether with closed tray, polyether with open tray nonsplinted copings, polyether with open tray splinted copings, polyvinyl siloxane–polyether hybrid with closed tray, polyvinyl siloxane–polyether hybrid with open tray nonsplinted copings, and polyvinyl siloxane–polyether hybrid with open tray splinted copings. Five samples of each group were evaluated. A total of 45 impressions were taken. A stainless steel master metal framework with three internal hex implants was fabricated and used to generate the samples. A common condensation silicone putty spacer was applied over the impression copings attached to the implants, which was then duplicated. All trays were fabricated on this duplicated silicone die using light cure acrylic resin. Trays to be used for open tray techniques had their top removed for gaining access to screws of the impression copings. Splinting of coping for OS group was done using pattern resin. Impressions were poured, and master cast was generated. Interimplant distance was measured using stereomicroscope and an image analyzing software. Results: Open nonsplinted technique resulted in significantly better replication of implant positions compared to open splinted and closed techniques. Hybrid impression material depicted significantly better dimensional accuracy than polyether and polyvinyl siloxane. Hybrid open nonsplinted depicted least mean difference in interimplant distance, followed by hybrid open splinted and polyether open splinted groups. Polyvinyl siloxane closed tray showed maximum difference in interimplant distance in comparison with other groups. Conclusion: Polyvinyl siloxane–polyether hybrid impression material and open nonsplinted technique gave best replication of implant positions on the master cast. Clinical significance: Accuracy of impressions and casts is of great importance for the fabrication and long-term clinical success of precisely fitting implant-retained prostheses.

  1. Lee H, Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, et al. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99(2):107–113. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60026-8.
  2. Cabral LM, Guedes CG. Comparative analysis of 4 impression techniques for implants. Implant Dent 2007;16(2):187–194. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3180587b3f.
  3. Burns J, Palmer R, Howe L, et al. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89(3):250–255. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2003.38.
  4. Rashidan N, Alikhasi M, Samadizadeh S, Beyabanaki E, Kharazifard MJ. Accuracy of implant impressions with different impression coping types and shapes. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Apr;14(2):218–225. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00241.x.
  5. Vigolo P, Fonzi F, Majzoub Z, et al. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92(5):470–476. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.08.015.
  6. de Avila ED, Barros LA, Del’ Acqua MA, et al. Comparison of the accuracy for three dental impression techniques and index: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont Res 2013;57(4):268–274. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2013.07.001.
  7. Conrad HJ, Pesun IJ, DeLong R, Hodges JS. Accuracy of two impression techniques with angulated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Jun;97(6):349–356. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60023-7.
  8. Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Tissue-integrated prostheses. Osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence; 1985, pp. 11–76.
  9. Siadat H, Alikhasi M, Beyabanaki E, Rahimian S. Comparison of Different Impression Techniques When Using the All-on-Four Implant Treatment Protocol. Int J Prosthodont. 2016 May-Jun;29(3):265–270. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4341.
  10. Burawi G, Houston F, Byrne D, et al. A comparison of the dimensional accuracy of the splinted and unsplinted impression techniques for the Bone-Lock implant system. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77(1):68–75. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(97)70209-9.
  11. Hsu CC, Millstein PL, Stein RS. A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant transfer techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69(6):588–593. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(93)90287-x.
  12. Enkling N, Bayer S, Jöhren P, et al. Vinylsiloxanether: a new impression material. clinical study of implant impressions with vinylsiloxanether versus polyether materials. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14(1):144–51. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00240.x
  13. Gupta S, Narayan AI, Balakrishnan D. In Vitro Comparative Evaluation of Different Types of Impression Trays and Impression Materials on the Accuracy of Open Tray Implant Impressions: A Pilot Study. Int J Dent. 2017;2017:6306530. DOI: 10.1155/2017/6306530.
  14. Akalin ZF, Ozkan YK, Ekerim A. Effects of implant angulation, impression material, and variation in arch curvature width on implant transfer model accuracy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28(1):149–157. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2070.
  15. Wee AG. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83(3):323–331. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70136-3.
  16. Baig MR. Accuracy of impressions of multiple implants in the edentulous arch: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Jul-Aug;29(4):869-80. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3233.
  17. Saunders WP, Sharkey SW, Smith GM, et al. Effect of impression tray design upon the accuracy of stone casts produced from a single-phase medium-bodied polyvinyl siloxane impression material. J Dent 1992;20(3):189–192. DOI: 10.1016/0300-5712(92)90139-4.
  18. Osman M, Abubakr NH, Suliman A, Ziada H. The impact of impression coping geometrical design on accuracy of implant impressions: an experimental study. Int J Implant Dent. 2020 Oct 10;6(1):54. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-020-00256-0.
  19. Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Gallucci GO, Doukoudakis A, Weber HP, Chronopoulos V. Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Jul-Aug;29(4):836-45. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3625.
  20. Selvaraj S, Dorairaj J, Mohan J, Simon P. Comparison of implant cast accuracy of multiple implant impression technique with different splinting materials: An in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2016;16(2):167-75. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.167937.
  21. Elshenawy EA, Alam-Eldein AM, Abd Elfatah FA. Cast accuracy obtained from different impression techniques at different implant angulations (in vitro study). Int J Implant Dent 2018;4(1):9. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-018-0118-6.
  22. Buzayan M, Baig MR, Yunus N. Evaluation of accuracy of complete-arch multiple-unit abutment-level dental implant impressions using different impression and splinting materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Nov-Dec;28(6):1512–1520. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2958.
  23. Arora A, Upadhyaya V, Parashar KR, et al. Evaluation of the effect of implant angulations and impression techniques on implant cast accuracy – an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2019;19(2):149–158. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_337_18.
  24. Shankar YR, Sahoo S, Krishna MH, Kumar PS, Kumar TS, Narula S. Accuracy of implant impressions using various impression techniques and impression materials. J Dent Implant 2016;6(1):29-36. DOI: 10.4103/0974-6781.190384
  25. Tabesh M, Alikhasi M, Siadat H. A Comparison of implant impression precision: Different materials and techniques. J Clin Exp Dent. 2018;10(2):e151-e157. DOI:10.4317/jced.54457
  26. Nakhaei M, Madani AS, Moraditalab A, Haghi HR. Three-dimensional accuracy of different impression techniques for dental implants. Dent Res J 2015;12:431–437 DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.166190
  27. Vojdani M, Torabi K, Ansarifard E. Accuracy of different impression materials in parallel and nonparallel implants. Dent Res J 2015;12(4):315–222. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.161429.
  28. Reddy S, Prasad K, Vakil H, et al. Accuracy of impressions with different impression materials in angulated implants. Niger J Clin Pract 2013;16(3):279–284. DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.113447.
  29. Naik J, Behera SSP, Galagali G, et al. Comparison of three dimensional accuracy of two implant level impression techniques; using three different elastomeric impression materials-an in vitro study. IP Ann Prosthodont Restor Dent 2019;5(3):68–71. DOI: 10.18231/j.aprd.2019.016.
  30. De La Cruz JE, Funkenbusch PD, Ercoli C, Moss ME, Graser GN, Tallents RH. Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Sep;88(3):329–336. DOI: 10.1067/mpr.2002.128070.
  31. Tandon A, Bulbule NS, Jagtap AK, Kakade DM. Comparative Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of Closed Tray and Open Tray Impression Technique for Dental Implants using Two Different Impression Materials. J Clin Diagn Res 2018;12(11): ZC34-ZC38. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2018/36235.12296.
  32. Baig MR. Multi-unit implant impression accuracy: a review of the literature. Quintessence Int 2014;45(1):39–51. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a30769.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.