Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions☆☆☆

Abstract 

Statement of problem. Given that meticulous implant prosthodontic procedures are recommended to obtain the best possible intraoral fit, impression materials that are suitable for use with a direct impression technique warrant further investigation. Purpose. This in vitro study compared the amount of torque required to rotate a square impression coping in an impression and evaluated the accuracy of solid implant casts fabricated from different impression materials. Material and methods. Two direct transfer implant impressions were made using 8 impression materials; the torque required to rotate an impression coping in the impressions was calculated. Ten direct transfer implant impressions were made from the master model and poured in a die stone (Resin Rock) for 3 of the 8 initial impression material groups. Linear distances between steel balls placed on each abutment replica were measured with a traveling microscope to determine distortion in the impression procedure for each group. Data were analyzed (P =.05) with ANOVA and Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsch multiple range test for post hoc. Results. With a 1-way ANOVA, average torque values among the material groups differed significantly (P =.001). Polyether (medium consistency) was found to produce the highest overall torque values, followed by addition silicone (high consistency), and then polysulfide (medium consistency). Statistically significant difference was also found among the 3 material groups’ mean absolute cast error using a 1-way ANOVA (P =.0086). Implant casts made from polyether (medium) or addition silicone (high) impressions were significantly more accurate than casts made from polysulfide medium impressions. Conclusion. On the basis of the results of this study, the use of either polyether (medium) or addition silicone (high) impression is recommended for direct implant impressions. (J Prosthet Dent 2000;83:323-31.)