Hey, dental explorers! 🌟 Let’s journey into the captivating realm of implant cast accuracy and the intricate interplay between implant angulations and impression techniques! 🦷🔬

The literature is buzzing with studies unveiling the secrets of digital vs. conventional implant impressions and the impact of those pesky implant angles on accuracy.

📚 Basaki et al. (2017) dived into digital vs. conventional impressions. For digital magic, angulation wasn’t a game-changer. But in the conventional realm, the material, connection type, and a dash of angulation might have stirred the accuracy potion.

Basaki et al. (2017) conducted a study comparing the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impression approaches. They found that for a digital impression approach, where material strain is not a concern, implant angulation did not have a significant influence on impression accuracy. This finding is consistent with previous studies that have also reported no effect of implant angulation on digital impression accuracy. However, the lack of influence on the error in the conventional approach could be potentially explained by the moderate angulation, choice of the impression material, and implant connection type.

🔍 Martínez-Rus et al. (2013) took on multiple implant systems and found metal-splinted direct technique ruling the accuracy charts. The journey went from most accurate to less-so with acrylic resin-splinted, indirect, and unsplinted direct methods.

Martínez-Rus et al. (2013) evaluated the effect of four implant-level impression techniques on the accuracy of definitive casts for a multiple internal connection implant system with different implant angulations and subgingival depths. They found that the metal-splinted direct technique produced the most accurate casts, followed by the acrylic resin-splinted direct, indirect, and unsplinted direct techniques. The study also reported that the accuracy of impressions for internal connection implants decreased as the divergence angle between implants increased.

🔬 Elshenawy et al. (2018) faced angulated implants head-on. Distortion danced with angulation, and unsplinted vs. acrylic resin-splinted techniques fought it out. Up to 15°, direct methods scored in accuracy.

Elshenawy et al. (2018) conducted a study comparing the dimensional accuracy of casts obtained from three impression techniques for three definitive lower casts with implants at different angulations. They found that implant angulation affected the impression accuracy, with increased angulation resulting in increased distortion. The study also reported that the direct unsplinted technique and direct acrylic resin-splinted technique exhibited more accuracy compared to the indirect technique when angulation of implants increased up to 15°.

🌐 Arora et al. (2019) explored parallel vs. angulated implants in the splinted vs. nonsplinted battle. The crown? Splinted technique won in angulated implants, staying true to parallel’s perfection.

Arora et al. (2019) evaluated the accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and nonsplinted impression techniques with multiple parallel and nonparallel implants. They found that the splinted technique in angulated implants exhibited greater accuracy compared to the nonsplinted technique in parallel implants. This finding was consistent with previous studies that reported less accurate impressions with angulated implants than parallel implants.

📊 Parameshwari et al. (2018) simulated unilateral partially edentulous scenarios. The pick-up technique charmed for multiple angulated implants.

Parameshwari et al. (2018) investigated the effects of implant angulation, type of impression material, and tray selection on impression accuracy in simulated master casts of unilateral partially edentulous situations. They found that there was no statistically significant difference in the accuracy of pick-up non-splinted and transfer techniques when there were three or fewer implants, but the pick-up technique produced superior accuracy for multiple implants with implant angulation more than 20 degrees.

In a nutshell, the harmony of implant cast accuracy is a symphony composed of angulation, impression technique, material, and the magic of digital vs. conventional. Remember, digital might be less angulation-sensitive. And whether you’re picking up or transferring, the choice matters in the land of precision! 🧙‍♀️🏰

Arora, A., Upadhyaya, V., Parashar, K., Malik, D. (2019). Evaluation Of the Effect Of Implant Angulations And Impression Techniques On Implant Cast Accuracy – An In Vitro Study. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 2(19), 149. https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_337_18 Basaki, K., Alkumru, H., Souza, G., Finer, Y. (2017). Accuracy Of Digital Vs Conventional Implant Impression Approach: a Three-dimensional Comparative In Vitro Analysis. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 4(32), 792-799. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5431 Elshenawy, E., Alam-Eldein, A., Elfatah, F. (2018). Cast Accuracy Obtained From Different Impression Techniques At Different Implant Angulations (In Vitro Study). International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 1(4). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-018-0118-6 Martínez-Rus, F., García, C., Santamaría, A., Özcan, M., Pradíes, G. (2013). Accuracy Of Definitive Casts Using 4 Implant-level Impression Techniques In a Scenario Of Multi-implant System With Different Implant Angulations And Subgingival Alignment Levels. Implant Dentistry, 3(22), 268-276. https://doi.org/10.1097/id.0b013e3182920dc5 Parameshwari, G., Chittaranjan, B., Sudhir, N., Ck, A., Taruna, M., M, R. (2018). Evaluation Of Accuracy Of Various Impression Techniques and Impression Materials In Recording Multiple Implants Placed Unilaterally In A Partially Edentulous Mandible- An In Vitro Study. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 0-0. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.54726