» Articles » PMID: 31297177

Comparison of Different Impression Techniques for Edentulous Jaws Using Three-dimensional Analysis

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2019 Jul 13
PMID 31297177
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare two novel impression methods and a conventional impression method for edentulous jaws using 3-dimensional (3D) analysis software.

Materials And Methods: Five edentulous patients (four men and one woman; mean age: 62.7 years) were included. Three impression techniques were used: conventional impression method (CI; control), simple modified closed-mouth impression method with a novel tray (SI), and digital impression method using an intraoral scanner (DI). Subsequently, a gypsum model was made, scanned, and superimposed using 3D analysis software. Mean area displacement was measured using CI method to evaluate differences in the impression surfaces as compared to those values obtained using SI and DI methods. The values were confirmed at two to five areas to determine the differences. CI and SI were compared at all areas, while CI and DI were compared at the supporting areas. Kruskal-Wallis test was performed for all data. Statistical significance was considered at value <.05.

Results: In the comparison of the CI and SI methods, the greatest difference was observed in the mandibular vestibule without statistical significance (>.05); the difference was < 0.14 mm in the maxilla. The difference in the edentulous supporting areas between the CI and DI methods was not significant (>.05).

Conclusion: The CI, SI, and DI methods were effective in making impressions of the supporting areas in edentulous patients. The SI method showed clinically applicability.

Citing Articles

A comprehensive narrative review exploring the current landscape of digital complete denture technology and advancements.

Park C Heliyon. 2025; 11(2):e41870.

PMID: 39906853 PMC: 11791138. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e41870.


Palatal vault configuration and its influence on intraoral scan time and accuracy in completely edentulous arches: a prospective clinical study.

Elawady D, Ibrahim W, Ghanem R, Osman R J Adv Prosthodont. 2024; 16(4):201-211.

PMID: 39221418 PMC: 11361821. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2024.16.4.201.


A Systematic Review of the Use of Intraoral Scanning for Human Identification Based on Palatal Morphology.

Kumar S, Chacko R, Kaur A, Ibrahim G, Ye D Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(5).

PMID: 38473003 PMC: 10930713. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14050531.


[Current Status and Analysis of the Clinical Application of Digital Technology in Oral Medicine].

Zhao Y, Wang Y Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2024; 55(1):101-110.

PMID: 38322515 PMC: 10839490. DOI: 10.12182/20240160301.


Accuracy of Intraoral Scanner for Recording Completely Edentulous Arches-A Systematic Review.

Srivastava G, Padhiary S, Mohanty N, Molinero-Mourelle P, Chebib N Dent J (Basel). 2023; 11(10).

PMID: 37886926 PMC: 10605168. DOI: 10.3390/dj11100241.


References
1.
Brennan J . An introduction to digital radiography in dentistry. J Orthod. 2002; 29(1):66-9. DOI: 10.1093/ortho/29.1.66. View

2.
COLLETT H . COMPLETE DENTURE IMPRESSIONS. J Prosthet Dent. 1965; 15:603-14. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(65)90030-2. View

3.
Koller M, Merlini L, Spandre G, Palla S . A comparative study of two methods for the orientation of the occlusal plane and the determination of the vertical dimension of occlusion in edentulous patients. J Oral Rehabil. 1992; 19(4):413-25. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1992.tb01583.x. View

4.
Azzam M, YURKSTAS A, Kronman J . The sublingual crescent extension and its relation to the stability and retention of mandibular complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 67(2):205-10. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(92)90454-i. View

5.
Kawai Y, Murakami H, Shariati B, Klemetti E, Blomfield J, Billette L . Do traditional techniques produce better conventional complete dentures than simplified techniques?. J Dent. 2005; 33(8):659-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.01.005. View