• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.323-337
• /
• 2010

The objective of this study was to examine the availability of the new impression coping by comparing with conventional coping in implant pick-up impression technique. Five implant fixtures were installed on #14, 21, 23, 25, 27 in acrylic resin model. That model with 5 fixtures was standard model, which was divided 3 groups; using new flag type impression coping, conventional impression coping splinted with self-curing resin, conventional impression coping without splinting. We made metal circular cones for calculation 3-dimensional coordinates by attaching to implant fixtures or analogs. Three-dimensional relationships of each model were calculated. Data was analyzed by multiple ANOVA and Bonferroni. The accuracy of impression between using new flag type impression coping and conventional impression coping did not show differences in 3 - dimensional analysis.Within limitations of this study, the new flag type impression coping is available in implant pick-up impression technique.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.2 no.4
• /
• pp.128-133
• /
• 2010

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the implant master cast according to the type (pick-up, transfer) and the length (long, short) of the impression copings. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The metal master cast was fabricated with three internal connection type implant analogs (Osstem GS III analog), embedded parallel and with $10^{\circ}$ of mesial angulation to the center analog. Four types of impression coping were prepared with different combinations of types (transfer, pick-up) and lengths (long, short) of the coping. The impressions were made using vinyl polysiloxane (one step, heavy + light body) with an individual tray, and 10 impressions were made for each group. Eventually, 40 experimental casts were produced. Then, the difference in the distance between the master cast and the experimental cast were measured, and the error rate was determined. The analysis of variance was performed using the SPSS (v 12.0) program (${\alpha}$= .05), and the statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS. The ANOVA showed that the pick-up type impression coping exhibited a significantly lower error rate than the transfer type. However, no significant difference was observed with respect to the length of the impression coping. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the parallel and mesial angulated groups. CONCLUSION. Within the limitations of this study, the pick-up type impression coping exhibited a more accurate implant master cast than the transfer type in parallel group. The accuracy of the implant master cast did not differ for different lengths of impression coping of at least 11 mm. Additionally, the accuracy of the implant cast was not different for the parallel and $10^{\circ}$ mesial angulated groups.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.265-270
• /
• 2018

PURPOSE. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new implant impression technique using bite impression coping and a dual arch tray. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two implant fixtures were placed on maxillary left second premolar and first molar area in dentoform model. The model with two fixtures was used as the reference. The impression was divided into 2 groups, n=10 each. In group 1, heavy/light body silicone impression was made with pick up impression copings and open tray. In group 2, putty/light body silicone impression was made with bite impression copings and dual arch tray. The reference model and the master casts with implant scan bodies were scanned by a laboratory scanner. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from test groups was superimposed with STL dataset of reference model using inspection software. The three-dimensional deviation between the reference model and impression models was calculated and illustrated as a color-map. Data was analyzed by independent samples T-test of variance at ${\alpha}=.05$. RESULTS. The mean 3D implant deviations of pick up impression group (group 1) and dual arch impression group (group 2) were 0.029 mm and 0.034 mm, respectively. The difference in 3D deviations between groups 1 and 2 was not statistically significant (P=.075). CONCLUSION. Within limitations of this study, the accuracy of implant impression using a bite impression coping and dual arch tray is comparable to that of conventional pick-up impression.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.57 no.4
• /
• pp.432-438
• /
• 2019

Accurate impression taking for the success of implant prosthesis is a very important process. Methods of taking implant impression include the conventional method using impression coping and impression material, and the digital method using an intraoral scanner and scanbody. However, the impression coping or the scanbody must install after remove healing abutment. Because of this, the dentist must repeat the process of removing and installing the healing abutment, the impression coping or the scanbody several times. In addition, the impression coping or the scanbody rises higher than the occlusal surface, so the patient has the inconvenience of constantly maintaining the open state. Recently, a scannable healing abutment, which can be scanned by a intraoral scanner directly, without the need to remove the healing abutment by applying a scannable part of the scanbody to the healing abutment, was introduced. We present a case of single posterior implant prosthesis using a scannable healing abutment.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.539-549
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of 3 implant impression methods by using strain gauge. The models used for this study were partially edentulous mandibular acrylic resin casts Model A, with two abutment analogs in #46,47 extraction site, represented two implant parallel to to the adjacent natural tooth. Model B represent an anterior implant parallel to the adjacene natural tooth and a posterior implant exhibiting a 15-degree lingual inclination. Master framework were fabricated on the master model, and 3 strain gauges were attached to a master framwork to determine the passivity of fit of the framework to sample casts made by the three impression techniques. The master framework was attached to each sample cast with gold screws, which were tightened with the torque driver to ensure a consistent toque application of 10 Ncm. Universal Digital Measuring System UCAM-5BT was used for strain measuring. Impression techniques studid were : 1. unsplinted tapered impression coping, polyvinyl siloxane, stock tray 2. unsplinted squared impression coping, polyether, custom tray 3. squared impression coping splinted with Duralay resin, polyether, custom tray Through analysis on data from this study, the following conclusions were obtained. 1. There were no statistically significant differences between the mean strain recorded from the sample casts made with the tree impression. But only strain values of model A(parallel group) Y-axis was signifcantly differed between Technique 1 and 3(P<0.05). 2. There was no statistically significant difference between model A(parallel group) and model B(15-degree divergent group).

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.234-239
• /
• 2020

Purpose: We investigated the marginal fit between abutment and metal copings according to impression technique, wax block types, and metal types. Methods: We selected the traditional impression method of using rubber impression materials and the digital impression method of using oral scanners, three types of wax blocks, and two types of metal, both of which were domestically and commercially available, were selected to produce metal copings, and the marginal fit was determined through the use of silicon replication. Results: The measurements of axial wall fit revealed that the IYV specimens had the best fit, with a mean gap of 24.11±5.95 ㎛, followed by CEV, CHV, CSS, CSV, CES, CHS, and IYS specimens (mean: 33.44±8.41 ㎛). The differences were not statistically significant. The marginal gap measurements showed that the CEV specimen had the smallest gap, 17.25±4.13 ㎛, followed by the CSV, CHV, CSS, CES, CHS, IYV, and IYS specimen (mean: 43.47±15.63 ㎛). The differences were statistically significant. Conclusion: The axial wall fit of the metal coping (VeraBond2V; Aalba Dent, Inc., Fairfield, CA, USA) produced by the lost wax technique with the traditional impression method was excellent. The marginal fit of the metal coping (VeraBond 2V) produced by wax milling with the use of an oral scanner was also excellent. The marginal fit of the metal coping was within the clinically acceptable limits in all groups.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.17-24
• /
• 2017

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the internal fitness of the resin coping that was fabricated by the traditional and Digital manufacturing methods through 3-dimensional analysis. Methods: maxillary right second molar was chosen implant master model. Custom-built impression trays were manufactured. After screwing the pick-up impression coping onto the master cast, impressions were made with silicone impression. The Working model was then made with type IV stone. The coping was fabricated: SLAC group (n=8), APPC group (n=8), LAPC group (n=8) Resin coping data was measured by using a three-dimensional evaluation program. Internal fitness was calculated by RMS (Root Mean Square).It measures mean and Standard Deviation (SD). Results: Three groups are measured $47.11{\pm}(3.08){\mu}m$ total RMS of SLAC group, $48.35({\pm}1.55{\mu}m)$ for total RMS of LAPC group, $43.45{\pm}2.09{\mu}m$ for total RMS of APPC group. Measured value is gradually increased. Followed by autopolymerized pattern resin; Stereolithography resin, Light-activated pattern resin But there were no differences stastically(P>0.321). Conclusion: Evaluation of internal fitness on Resin copings was fabricated by three-ways methods showed that no differences statistically significant and clinically acceptable results.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.9-20
• /
• 2023

Purpose: We investigated the effect of open tray impression using pick-up impression coping and close tray impression using transfer impression coping on the accuracy of impression in edentulous patients on their mandibular parts. the effect of material types of pick-up type impression copings for splinting in open tray impression on the accuracy of impression was also evaluated. Materials and Methods: Two implant fixtures were implanted in parallel in the left molar of the mandibular in the shape of a mandibular partial edentulous model. The 40 individual trays were fabricated using 3D printer. The prepared individual trays were classified into 4 groups (i.e., PN, PG, PH, and TN groups), and a total of 40 impression-takings were conducted. A master cast was connected to a Scan Body. The converted STL file was super-imposed on the scan images of the various groups. Results: The order of standard deviation values decreased as follows: PN (0.2343 ± 0.0844 mm), TN (0.2192 ± 0.0840 mm), indicating that the high accuracy of impression for TN group. In addition, for the comparison results between the material types used in splinting the open tray impression, the PH group showed a relatively lower standard deviation (0.1910 ± 0.1176 mm) than that of the PN group (0.2343 ± 0.0844 mm), PG group (0.2556 ± 0.1082 mm). Conclusion: The acrylic resin synthesized by light-induced polymerization exhibited a higher accuracy of impression taking than that of autopolymerizing acrylic resin. Meanwhile, the accuracy of impression taking was not dependent on the implant impression taking method or the presence of connection/fixation of impression copings.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.29-40
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of impression taking method using the encoded healing abutment, scan body and pick-up impression coping with different implant angulations. Materials and Methods: Master model was fabricated by 3D printer and three implants were placed into the model with 0°, 10° and 20° mesial angulation. The abutments were secured to each implants and master model was scanned to make a reference model. Group P model was fabricated using pick-up impression copings and model was scanned after securing the abutments. Encoded healing abutment (Group E) and scan body (Group S) were secured on the master model and digital impression was taken using intraoral scanner 15 times each. Each STL files of test groups were superimposed with reference model using best fit alignment and root mean square (RMS) value was analyzed. Results: The RMS values were lowest in Group P, followed by Group S and Group E. Group P showed significant difference with Group S and E (P < 0.05) while there was no significant difference between Group S and E. Correlation between implant angulation and RMS value was significant in Group E (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The pick-up impression coping method showed higher accuracy and there was no significant difference in accuracy between the healing abutment and the scan body. The clinical use of the encoded healing abutment is possible, but it should be used with caution in the case of angulated implant.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.2
• /
• pp.105-110
• /
• 2015

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 3 dimensional accuracy of impression taking on the newly developed healing abutment and impression coping combined system comparing conventional pick-up type impression. Materials and methods: For 10 patients who had a single missing tooth on molar area, dental implants (SuperLine; Dentium, Seoul, Korea) were placed and healing abutment (MyHealing; Raphabio Co., Seoul, Korea) abutments were connected. After 3 months, transfer type impression with MyHealing and pick-up type impression with impression coping were performed twice in the same patients, and master models were fabricated. Customized prosthetic abutments (Myplant; Raphabio Co., Seoul, Korea) were milled and connected to the master casts. Through a dental scanner (Scanner S600; Zirkonzahn, South Tyrol, Italy), the master casts were converted into virtual casts. The length and angulation differences between casts were measured using 3 dimentional analysis program (Geomagic Qualify 12; Geomagic, Morrisville, NC, USA). Statistical significance was calculated using Kruskal Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test (${\alpha}$=.05). Results: The length differences between the two systems were 0.032 mm in sagittal plane, and 0.029 in coronal plane, and 0.023 mm in horizontal plane. The angulation differences were $0.755^{\circ}$ in sagittal plane, and $1.275^{\circ}$ in coronal plane, and $0.420^{\circ}$ in horizontal plane. Conclusion: The accuracy of newly developed healing abutment system is similar to that of conventional pick-up impression. The new system can reduces chair time by not using separate impression coping.