PDF herunterladen
Zahnmedizin up2date 2016; 10(04): 359-380
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-104524
Prothetik
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Abformung – konventionell versus digital

David Zügel
,
Ralph G. Luthardt
,
Michael R. Graf
,
Heike Rudolph
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
01. August 2016 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints Alle Artikel dieser Rubrik
Schlussfolgerung

Mit beiden Möglichkeiten – der konventionellen Abformung mit Sägemodellerstellung und der intra- bzw. extraoralen Digitalisierung – zur Erfassung und Übertragung der intraoralen Situation ist ein hohes Maß an Präzision erzielbar, sofern es sich um Einzelzähne oder kurze Spannen handelt. Bei ganzen Quadranten oder Kiefern ist derzeit die konventionelle Abformung und Modellerstellung mit anschließender extraoraler Digitalisierung, sofern CAD/CAM-Verfahren zum Einsatz kommen sollen, die Methode der Wahl.

Sowohl bei der konventionellen Abformung mehrerer Pfeiler als auch bei der intraoralen Erfassung gibt es eine Lernkurve, die vom Anwender anfangs berücksichtigt werden muss. Der Anspruch an die jeweiligen Fertigkeiten steigt bei beiden Vorgehensweisen mit der Zahl der zu erfassenden Pfeiler.

Die CAD/CAM-Technologie kann die konventionelle Fertigung um verschiedene Materialien und Indikationen ergänzen, jedoch nicht ersetzen. Dennoch steht fest, dass die optische digitale Datenerfassung das konventionelle Behandlungsspektrum maßgeblich erweitert und dadurch neue Behandlungspfade möglich macht.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE et al. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 84: 419-424
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Felton DA, Kanoy BE, Bayne SC et al. Effect of in vivo crown margin discrepancies on periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65: 357-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Sorensen SE, Larsen IB, Jorgensen KD. Gingival and alveolar bone reaction to marginal fit of subgingival crown margins. Scand J Dent Res 1986; 94: 109-114
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Geurtsen W. Crown and restoration margins. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1990; 45: 380-386
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Kosyfaki P, del Pilar Pinilla Martin M, Strub JR. Relationship between crowns and the periodontium: a literature update. Quintessence Int 2010; 41: 109-126
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Morse DE, Holm-Pedersen P, Holm-Pedersen J et al. Prosthetic crowns and other clinical risk indicators of caries among old-old Swedish adults: findings from the KEOHS Project. Kungsholmen Elders Oral Health Study. Gerodontology 2002; 19: 73-79
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Reitemeier B, Hänsel K, Walter MH et al. Effect of posterior crown margin placement on gingival health. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 167-172
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carrotte PV, Winstanley RB, Green JR. A study of the quality of impressions for anterior crowns received at a commercial laboratory. Br Dent J 1993; 174: 235-240
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Eames WB, Wallace SW, Suway NB et al. Accuracy and dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1979; 42: 159-162
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Hamalian TA, Nasr E, Chidiac JJ. Impression materials in fixed prosthodontics: influence of choice on clinical procedure. J Prosthodont 2011; 20: 153-160
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rudolph H, Quaas S, Luthardt R. Precision of duplicate dies made with different impression making procedures. Dent Mater 2008; 25: e27-e28
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Lee IK, DeLong R, Pintado MR et al. Evaluation of factors affecting the accuracy of impressions using quantitative surface analysis. Oper Dent 1995; 20: 246-252
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Luthardt RG, Walter MH, Weber A et al. Clinical parameters influencing the accuracy of 1- and 2-stage impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Prosthodont 2008; 21: 322-327
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Noack T, Balkenhol M, Ferger P et al. Accuracy of different polyvinylsiloxanes. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 2004; 59: 590-592
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Siemer A, Balkenhol M, Trost M et al. Accuracy of one-step vs. two-step putty-wash impressions – a 3-D in-vitro evaluation. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 2004; 59: 585-589
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Wichmann M, Borchers L, Limmroth E. Measuring the accuracy of various elastomeric impression materials using a CNC coordinate measuring device (Part 1). Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1990; 45: 499-502
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Rudolph H, Graf MR, Kuhn K et al. Performance of dental impression materials: Benchmarking of materials and techniques by three-dimensional analysis. Dent Mater J 2015; 34: 572-584
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Rubel BS. Impression materials: a comparative review of impression materials most commonly used in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2007; 51: 629-642 vi
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Stober T, Johnson GH, Schmitter M. Accuracy of the newly formulated vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression material. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 103: 228-239
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bader F, Setz J. Wettability and accuracy of reproduction of impression materials. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 1991; 46: 346-348
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Blatz MB. Impression techniques and their relation to material properties. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2003; 15: 512
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Brown D. Materials for impressions – 2003. Dent Update 2004; 31: 40-45
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Habib ANA, Shehata MT. The effect of the type and technique used for impression making on the accuracy of elastomeric impression materials. Egypt Dent J 1995; 41: 1409-1416
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Lu H, Nguyen B, Powers JM. Mechanical properties of three hydrophilic addition silicone and polyether elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 151-154
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Luthardt RG, Koch R, Rudolph H et al. Qualitative computer aided evaluation of dental impressions in vivo. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 69-76
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mandikos MN. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical use. Aust Dent J 1998; 43: 428-434
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Stewardson DA. Trends in indirect dentistry: 5. Impression materials and techniques. Dent Update 2005; 32: 374-376 379–380, 382–384
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco 2nd MT et al. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J Prosthodont 2002; 11: 98-108
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wöstmann B, Höing M, Ferger P. Vergleich von hand- und maschinengemischten Abformmassen (Pentamix-System). Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1998; 53: 753-756
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Rudolph H, Quaas S, Haim M et al. Randomized controlled clinical trial on the three-dimensional accuracy of fast-set impression materials. Clin Oral Investig 2013; 17: 1397-1406
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Bennani V, Schwass D, Chandler N. Gingival retraction techniques for implants versus teeth: current status. J Am Dent Assoc 2008; 139: 1354-1363
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Baharav H, Kupershmidt I, Laufer BZ et al. The effect of sulcular width on the linear accuracy of impression materials in the presence of an undercut. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17: 585-589
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Nemetz EH, Seibly W. The use of chemical agents in gingival retraction. Gen Dent 1990; 38: 104-108
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Donovan TE, Gandara BK, Nemetz H. Review and survey of medicaments used with gingival retraction cords. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53: 525-531
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Goldberg PV, Higginbottom FL, Wilson TG. Periodontal considerations in restorative and implant therapy. Periodontol 2000; 2001: 100-109
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Wadhwani CP, Johnson GH, Lepe X et al. Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 530-539
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Haim M, Luthardt RG, Rudolph H et al. Randomized controlled clinical study on the accuracy of two-stage putty-and-wash impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 2009; 22: 296-302
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Luthardt RG, Walter MH, Quaas S et al. Comparison of the three-dimensional correctness of impression techniques: a randomized controlled trial. Quintessence Int 2010; 41: 845-853
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Rudolph H, Quaas S, Haim M et al. Randomized controlled clinical trial on the three-dimensional accuracy of fast-set impression materials. Clin Oral Investig 2013; 17: 1397-1406
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Rudolph H, Röhl A, Walter MH et al. Performance of fast-setting impression materials in the reproduction of subgingival tooth surfaces without soft tissue retraction. Int J Prosthodont 2014; 27: 366-375
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Quaas S, Loos R, Rudolph H et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing direct intraoral digitization and extraoral digitization after impression taking. Int J Prosthodont 2015; 28: 30-32
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Kamegawa M, Nakamura M, Fukui Y et al. Direct 3-D morphological measurements of silicone rubber impression using micro-focus X-ray CT. Dent Mater J 2010; 29: 68-74
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Luthardt RG. Randomized controlled trial of impression techniques – accuracy of the three-dimensional reproduction of the relation of prepared tooth to adjacent teeth. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z 2003; 58: 337-342
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Schaefer O, Schmidt M, Goebel R et al. Qualitative and quantitative three-dimensional accuracy of a single tooth captured by elastomeric impression materials: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2012; 108: 165-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Shah S, Sundaram G, Bartlett D et al. The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimpositional software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques. J Dent 2004; 32: 653-658
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Sjogren AP, Lindgren JE, Huggare JA. Orthodontic study cast analysis – reproducibility of recordings and agreement between conventional and 3D virtual measurements. J Digit Imaging 2010; 23: 482-492
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Stimmelmayr M, Erdelt K, Güth JF et al. Evaluation of impression accuracy for a four-implant mandibular model – a digital approach. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16: 1137-1142
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Brosky ME, Pesun IJ, Lowder PD et al. Laser digitization of casts to determine the effect of tray selection and cast formation technique on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 204-209
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Petrie CS, Walker MP, Oʼmahony AM et al. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under dry, moist, and wet conditions. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 90: 365-372
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Stimmelmayr M, Güth JF, Erdelt K et al. Digital evaluation of the reproducibility of implant scanbody fit-an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16: 851-856
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Al-Bakri IA, Hussey D, Al-Omari WM. The dimensional accuracy of four impression techniques with the use of addition silicone impression materials. J Clin Dent 2007; 18: 29-33
    Google Scholar
  • 52 Balkenhol M, Ferger P, Wostmann B. Dimensional accuracy of 2-stage putty-wash impressions: influence of impression trays and viscosity. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20: 573-575
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Fenske C. The influence of five impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of master models. Braz Dent J 2000; 11: 19-27
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Franco EB, da Cunha LF, Herrera FS et al. Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique. ISRN Dent 2011; 2011: 341546
    Google Scholar
  • 55 Gomez-Polo M, Celemin A, del Rio J et al. Influence of technique and pouring time on dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane and polyether impressions. Int J Prosthodont 2012; 25: 353-356
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Hassan AK. Dimensional accuracy of 3 silicone dental impression materials. East Mediterr Health J 2006; 12: 632-636
    Google Scholar
  • 57 Hoyos A, Soderholm KJ. Influence of tray rigidity and impression technique on accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane impressions. Int J Prosthodont 2011; 24: 49-54
    Google Scholar
  • 58 Levartovsky S, Lew G, Brosh T et al. Dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane impression material reproducing the sulcular area. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 25-31
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Nissan J, Laufer BZ, Brosh T et al. Accuracy of three polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 83: 161-165
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Nissan J, Gross M, Shifman A et al. Effect of wash bulk on the accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impressions. J Oral Rehabil 2002; 29: 357-361
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Omar R, Abdullah MA, Sherfudhin H. Influence on dimensional accuracy of volume of wash material introduced into pre-spaced putty/wash impressions. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2003; 11: 149-155
    Google Scholar
  • 62 Pereira JR, Murata KY, Valle AL et al. Linear dimensional changes in plaster die models using different elastomeric materials. Braz Oral Res 2010; 24: 336-341
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Piwowarczyk A, Ottl P, Büchler A et al. In vitro study on the dimensional accuracy of selected materials for monophase elastic impression making. Int J Prosthodont 2002; 15: 168-174
    Google Scholar
  • 64 Shiozawa M, Takahashi H, Finger WJ et al. Effects of the space for wash materials on sulcus depth reproduction with addition-curing silicone using two-step putty-wash technique. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 150-155
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Tredwin CJ, Nesbit M, Butta R et al. Effect of a laboratory surfactant on compatibility of type IV dental stones with addition-cured silicone impression materials. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2008; 16: 73-76
    Google Scholar
  • 66 Chandran DT, Jagger DC, Jagger RG et al. Two- and three-dimensional accuracy of dental impression materials: effects of storage time and moisture contamination. Biomed Mater Eng 2010; 20: 243-249
    Google Scholar
  • 67 Cayouette MJ, Burgess JO, Jones jr RE et al. Three-dimensional analysis of dual-arch impression trays. Quintessence Int 2003; 34: 189-198
    Google Scholar
  • 68 Kwon JH, Son YH, Han CH et al. Accuracy of implant impressions without impression copings: a three-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105: 367-373
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Papaspyridakos P, Benic GI, Hogsett VL et al. Accuracy of implant casts generated with splinted and non-splinted impression techniques for edentulous patients: an optical scanning study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23: 676-681
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Persson AS, Odén A, Andersson M et al. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 929-936
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Kuhn K, Ostertag S, Ostertag M et al. Comparison of an analog and digital quantitative and qualitative analysis for the fit of dental copings. Comput Biol Med 2015; 57: 32-41
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Quaas S, Rudolph H, Luthardt RG. Direct mechanical data acquisition of dental impressions for the manufacturing of CAD/CAM restorations. J Dent 2007; 35: 903-908
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Rudolph H, Salmen H, Moldan M et al. Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2016; 24: 85-94
    Google Scholar
  • 74 Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013; 109: 121-128
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Cook KT, Fasbinder DJ. Accuracy of CAD/CAM crown fit with infrared and LED cameras. Int J Comput Dent 2012; 15: 315-326
    Google Scholar
  • 76 Patzelt SB, Vonau S, Stampf S et al. Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws. J Am Dent Assoc 2013; 144: 914-920
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen CJ et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016; 27: 465-472
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Chen H, Wang H, Lv P et al. Quantitative evaluation of tissue surface adaption of CAD-designed and 3D printed wax pattern of maxillary complete denture. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 453968
    Google Scholar
  • 79 Kattadiyil MT, Mursic Z, AlRumaih H et al. Intraoral scanning of hard and soft tissues for partial removable dental prosthesis fabrication. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 444-448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Matsuda T, Goto T, Yagi K et al. Part-digitizing system of impression and interocclusal record for complete denture fabrication. J Prosthodont 2015; DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12375.
    Google Scholar