The Accuracy of Conventional Versus Digital Implant Impression Techniques

Mohamed Mahmoud Dohiem

Status: Unknown

Conditions: Missing Teeth

Treatments: Other: open tray impression; Other: digital impression for normal abutment; Other: closed tray impression

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT04908618

256413854

Details and patient eligibility

About

Intraoral oral scanning significantly improves scanning accuracy compared to digitized conventional impression techniques. The digitized closed tray impression technique showed significantly more accurate results than the digitized open-tray impression technique in partially edentulous patients.

Full description

The study was a controlled clinical trial using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging and flapless surgical technique to place implants. Cone-beam Computed Topography of the patients was taken by x-ray machine to create a DICOM file of the patient. Intraoral scanning to create STL Files of the patient arches. Each patient had undergone four impression techniques: Conventional impression I; Closed tray impression technique, Conventional impression II; Splinted Open tray impression technique, Digital impression I; intraoral scanning of readymade abutments and Digital impression II; intraoral scanning using scan bodies. To digitize the Conventional impressions I and II, the readymade abutment was screwed on the analogs of the resultant stone casts, followed by digital scanning. Using the scan body, the exact implant position was determined and the implants were added using a digital library. The custom abutment was fabricated on the implant replica with the same readymade abutment measurement. Using the inspection software, a custom abutment was superimposed on each readymade abutment in all the readymade abutment scanning data with the best-fit algorithm. Then the custom abutment was saved as a new STL file for comparison. The digital impression I was set as a reference in all the coming comparisons. The comparison was done from different data acquisition techniques by using inspection software between Digital impression I, Digital impression II; and finally, with the digitized STL of the Conventional impressions I and II.

Enrollment: 8 estimated patients

Sex: Male

Ages: 30 to 50 years old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Partial edentulous patients

  • Sufficient bone volume to insert implants
  • Age ranging from 30-50.
  • Good oral hygiene.
  • Intact hard and soft tissues, including treated teeth decay and healed teeth extraction socket

Exclusion criteria

• • Completely edentulous patients

  • Patients with Bruxism or clinching
  • need for bone augmentation,
  • uncompensated diabetes mellitus,
  • immunocompromised status, radio- and/or chemotherapy
  • previous treatment with oral and/or intravenous aminobisphosphonates.
  • Undergoing orthodontic treatment;
  • Patients with metal crowns and any other metal materials on teeth
  • Patients with soft tissue lesions and postoperative scars on the palate

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Non-Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Single Blind

---

8 participants in 4 patient groups

digital impression with normal abutment for dental implant

Active Comparator group

Description:

digital impression using a ready-made abutment for dental implant

Treatment:

Other: digital impression for normal abutment

Other: closed tray impression

Other: open tray impression

digital impression with scan abutment for dental implant

Experimental group

Description:

digital impression with scan body abutment for dental implant

Treatment:

Other: digital impression for normal abutment

Other: closed tray impression

Other: open tray impression

open tray conventional dental implant impression

Experimental group

Description:

Digitized open tray dental implant impression

Treatment:

Other: digital impression for normal abutment

Other: closed tray impression

Other: open tray impression

closed tray impression for dental implant

Experimental group

Description:

Digitized closed tray dental implant impression

Treatment:

Other: digital impression for normal abutment

Other: open tray impression