Torque resistance of impression copings after direct implant impression: An in vitro evaluation of impression materials with and without adhesive

Abstract Statement of problem No data are available on the ability of an impression coping to resist the manual placement of an abutment replica (implant analog) during prosthodontic laboratory procedures after a direct (pick-up) impression. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 2017-01, Vol.117 (1), p.73-80
Hauptverfasser: Auroy, Pascal, DDS, PhD, Nicolas, Emanuel, DDS, PhD, Bedouin, Yvan, DDS
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Statement of problem No data are available on the ability of an impression coping to resist the manual placement of an abutment replica (implant analog) during prosthodontic laboratory procedures after a direct (pick-up) impression. Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the torque resistance of impression copings after a direct impression, that is, the amount of rotational torque sufficient to induce irreversible displacement of impression copings in the impression material bulk once the impression has been made. Material and methods A reference model with 5 abutment replicas was constructed. Five impression copings were screwed onto the abutment replicas, and standardized impressions were made. A controlled twisting force was applied to each impression coping. A torque tester recorded the torque variation. Three elastomeric impression materials were tested. ANOVA and the Tukey test (α=.05) were performed using an average of 30 measurements per impression material, with and without adhesive. Results ANOVA and the Tukey test results showed that the adhesive, cohesive, and mechanical bonds between the impression coping and the impression material depended greatly on the type of material and that the average rupture threshold of these bonds was statistically significantly different in pairwise comparisons ( P
ISSN:0022-3913
1097-6841
DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.05.002