-
All Events
IAO-EAO-SIdP joint meeting 2024EAO-DGI joint meeting 202329th Annual Scientific CongressEAO Digital Days 2021EAO Digital Days 202028th Annual Scientific Congress27th Annual Scientific Congress26th Annual Scientific Congress25th Annual Scientific Congress24th Annual Scientific Congress23rd Annual Scientific Congress -
All Content TypesAbstractArticle ReviewePosterLearning moduleLearning QuizMatching SlidePDF DocumentWebcast
-
Sort ByRelevance
Background
After successful osseointegration and reentry procedure, the decision to perform an implant impression or not is based on clinical and radiographical assessment methods. Single radiographs focusing on the platforms of the implant and the related impression post are commonly used to confirm a correct fit between the components. However, information and knowledge on the ability to detect the presence or absence of a gap at this interface are lacking.
Aims
To investigate the theoretically estimated radiographical gap detectability and the gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface before impression taking. It was hypothesized that no difference would be observed between the two theoretically estimated gap values (detectable vs acceptable).
Methods
A survey was performed at the Dental School of the University of Bern. Thirty prosthodontists were included and interviewed concerning their subjective theoretical estimations of (A) the radiographical gap detectability between an implant and the related impression post, and (B) the maximally acceptable gap size at this interface aiming to perform the implant impression. The estimated gap values for the detectability and the acceptability were analyzed with descriptive methods and comparisons performed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test.
Results
The gap size theoretically detectable at the implant-abutment interface was estimated significantly higher on radiographs than the gap size that would be clinically accepted by the dentist for the implant impression procedure (p=0.046). The estimated mean values ± standard deviations were 155µm ± 199µm for A (radiographical gap detectability) and 65µm ± 43µm for B (gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface). The estimations ranged between 10 – 1000µm and 2 – 200µm for A and B, with median values of 100µm and 50 µm, respectively.
Conclusions
The theoretically detectable misfit at the interface was estimated 2x higher on radiographs than the dentists would accept to perform the implant impression. In conclusion, radiographical assessment cannot be considered specific enough in relation to the acceptable gap estimation. Thus, additional and more accurate assessment methods are required to fulfill the estimated needs for implant impression decision making. A practical study is needed to confirm the results from this theoretical survey.
Background
After successful osseointegration and reentry procedure, the decision to perform an implant impression or not is based on clinical and radiographical assessment methods. Single radiographs focusing on the platforms of the implant and the related impression post are commonly used to confirm a correct fit between the components. However, information and knowledge on the ability to detect the presence or absence of a gap at this interface are lacking.
Aims
To investigate the theoretically estimated radiographical gap detectability and the gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface before impression taking. It was hypothesized that no difference would be observed between the two theoretically estimated gap values (detectable vs acceptable).
Methods
A survey was performed at the Dental School of the University of Bern. Thirty prosthodontists were included and interviewed concerning their subjective theoretical estimations of (A) the radiographical gap detectability between an implant and the related impression post, and (B) the maximally acceptable gap size at this interface aiming to perform the implant impression. The estimated gap values for the detectability and the acceptability were analyzed with descriptive methods and comparisons performed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test.
Results
The gap size theoretically detectable at the implant-abutment interface was estimated significantly higher on radiographs than the gap size that would be clinically accepted by the dentist for the implant impression procedure (p=0.046). The estimated mean values ± standard deviations were 155µm ± 199µm for A (radiographical gap detectability) and 65µm ± 43µm for B (gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface). The estimations ranged between 10 – 1000µm and 2 – 200µm for A and B, with median values of 100µm and 50 µm, respectively.
Conclusions
The theoretically detectable misfit at the interface was estimated 2x higher on radiographs than the dentists would accept to perform the implant impression. In conclusion, radiographical assessment cannot be considered specific enough in relation to the acceptable gap estimation. Thus, additional and more accurate assessment methods are required to fulfill the estimated needs for implant impression decision making. A practical study is needed to confirm the results from this theoretical survey.
Background
After successful osseointegration and reentry procedure, the decision to perform an implant impression or not is based on clinical and radiographical assessment methods. Single radiographs focusing on the platforms of the implant and the related impression post are commonly used to confirm a correct fit between the components. However, information and knowledge on the ability to detect the presence or absence of a gap at this interface are lacking.
Aims
To investigate the theoretically estimated radiographical gap detectability and the gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface before impression taking. It was hypothesized that no difference would be observed between the two theoretically estimated gap values (detectable vs acceptable).
Methods
A survey was performed at the Dental School of the University of Bern. Thirty prosthodontists were included and interviewed concerning their subjective theoretical estimations of (A) the radiographical gap detectability between an implant and the related impression post, and (B) the maximally acceptable gap size at this interface aiming to perform the implant impression. The estimated gap values for the detectability and the acceptability were analyzed with descriptive methods and comparisons performed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test.
Results
The gap size theoretically detectable at the implant-abutment interface was estimated significantly higher on radiographs than the gap size that would be clinically accepted by the dentist for the implant impression procedure (p=0.046). The estimated mean values ± standard deviations were 155µm ± 199µm for A (radiographical gap detectability) and 65µm ± 43µm for B (gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface). The estimations ranged between 10 – 1000µm and 2 – 200µm for A and B, with median values of 100µm and 50 µm, respectively.
Conclusions
The theoretically detectable misfit at the interface was estimated 2x higher on radiographs than the dentists would accept to perform the implant impression. In conclusion, radiographical assessment cannot be considered specific enough in relation to the acceptable gap estimation. Thus, additional and more accurate assessment methods are required to fulfill the estimated needs for implant impression decision making. A practical study is needed to confirm the results from this theoretical survey.
Background
After successful osseointegration and reentry procedure, the decision to perform an implant impression or not is based on clinical and radiographical assessment methods. Single radiographs focusing on the platforms of the implant and the related impression post are commonly used to confirm a correct fit between the components. However, information and knowledge on the ability to detect the presence or absence of a gap at this interface are lacking.
Aims
To investigate the theoretically estimated radiographical gap detectability and the gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface before impression taking. It was hypothesized that no difference would be observed between the two theoretically estimated gap values (detectable vs acceptable).
Methods
A survey was performed at the Dental School of the University of Bern. Thirty prosthodontists were included and interviewed concerning their subjective theoretical estimations of (A) the radiographical gap detectability between an implant and the related impression post, and (B) the maximally acceptable gap size at this interface aiming to perform the implant impression. The estimated gap values for the detectability and the acceptability were analyzed with descriptive methods and comparisons performed using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test.
Results
The gap size theoretically detectable at the implant-abutment interface was estimated significantly higher on radiographs than the gap size that would be clinically accepted by the dentist for the implant impression procedure (p=0.046). The estimated mean values ± standard deviations were 155µm ± 199µm for A (radiographical gap detectability) and 65µm ± 43µm for B (gap acceptability at the implant-abutment interface). The estimations ranged between 10 – 1000µm and 2 – 200µm for A and B, with median values of 100µm and 50 µm, respectively.
Conclusions
The theoretically detectable misfit at the interface was estimated 2x higher on radiographs than the dentists would accept to perform the implant impression. In conclusion, radiographical assessment cannot be considered specific enough in relation to the acceptable gap estimation. Thus, additional and more accurate assessment methods are required to fulfill the estimated needs for implant impression decision making. A practical study is needed to confirm the results from this theoretical survey.