Accuracy of Implant Position Transfer and Surface Detail Reproduction with Different Impression Materials and Techniques

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant position transfer and surface detail reproduction using two impression techniques and materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS A metal model with two implants and three grooves of 0.25, 0.50 and 0.75 mm in depth on the flat superior surface of a die was fabricated. Ten regular-body polyether (PE) and 10 regular-body polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions with square and conical transfer copings using open tray and closed tray techniques were made for each group. Impressions were poured with type IV stone, and linear and angular displacements of the replica heads were evaluated using a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). Also, accurate reproduction of the grooves was evaluated by a video measuring machine (VMM). These measurements were compared with the measurements calculated on the reference model that served as control, and the data were analyzed with two-way ANOVA and t-test at P= 0.05. RESULTS There was less linear displacement for PVS and less angular displacement for PE in closed-tray technique, and less linear displacement for PE in open tray technique (P<0.001). Also, the open tray technique showed less angular displacement with the use of PVS impression material. Detail reproduction accuracy was the same in all the groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSION The open tray technique was more accurate using PE, and also both closed tray and open tray techniques had acceptable results with the use of PVS. The choice of impression material and technique made no significant difference in surface detail reproduction.