Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Impression Techniques Used for Maxillary Hybrid Prosthesis

NCT05321589 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: A25100221
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 12
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

evaluation and comparison of the accuracy of conventional and digital impression for full arch screw retained prosthesis for edentulous maxilla.

Conditions

Prosthesis Durability

Keywords

digital impression, conventional impression

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• accuracy of impression technique

  deviation measurements digitally

  immediately after the intervention/procedure

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• passivity of final restoration

  immediately after the intervention/procedure

Study Arms (2)

technique 1: conventional splinted open tray impression

OTHER

a conventional open tray impression technique splinted with ligature wire and duralay resin was done with polyvinyl siloxane impression . analogues were screwed to the impression copings and casts were poured.

Other: impression techniques for implant used for maxillary screw retained hybrid prosthesis

technique 2: digital intraoral impression technique

OTHER

scan bodies were screwed to implants intraorally and digital scanner was used to record digital impression, scanning protocol started from occlusal ,buccal to palatal surfaces. The resulting scans were then exported in the standard tessellation format (.STL)

Other: impression techniques for implant used for maxillary screw retained hybrid prosthesis

Interventions

impression techniques for implant used for maxillary screw retained hybrid prosthesis OTHER

conventional splinted open tray impression technique was done for maxillary implants to fabricate screw retained hybrid prosthesis and digital intra oral impression was done for the same patients after screwing scan bodies to the implants intra orally. evaluation of accuracy and 3D deviation between the two techniques was done

Also known as: digital and conventional impression techniques

technique 1: conventional splinted open tray impression; technique 2: digital intraoral impression technique

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 50 Years - 65 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Completely edentulous maxillary and mandibular ridges
• Healthy ridge covered by normal oral mucosa and free from any ridge flabbiness.
• All of the patients were dissatisfied with the retention and stability of their maxillary conventional dentures and expressed a strong desire for a more stable prosthesis.
• Sufficient bone quantity and quality in the front and posterior maxillary regions, as determined by preoperative CBCT, to accommodate six implants with a diameter of at least 3.5 mm and a length of at least 10 mm.
• Enough restorative space (from the mucosa covering the crest of the maxillary residual ridge to the occlusal plane) to allow the fixed prosthesis to be constructed ,preliminary jaw relationship revealed this.
• It's been at least a year since the last extraction.

You may not qualify if:

• <!-- -->
• Systemic diseases that may alter tissue response to implantation and affects osseointegration (radiation, diabetes, osteoporosis, bleeding disorders or hepatic patients)
• Long term immunosuppressive and corticosteroid drug therapy.
• Patient with abnormal habits as clenching and bruxism.
• Smoking patients.
• Patients with problems in TMJ.
• Neuromuscular diseases.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Mansoura University: lead

Study Sites (1)

faculty of Dentistry , Mansoura University

Al Mansurah, DK, 35516, Egypt

Location

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Prosthesis Failure

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Postoperative Complications; Pathologic Processes; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: CROSSOVER
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: associate professor

Model Details: the conventional open tray splinted impression technique and the digital intraoral impression technique were done for each patient

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: March 21, 2022
• First Posted: April 11, 2022
• Study Start: March 1, 2021
• Primary Completion: February 20, 2022
• Study Completion: March 20, 2022
• Last Updated: April 11, 2022

Record last verified: 2022-04

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

EG (1)