Download PDF
ZWR - Das Deutsche Zahnärzteblatt 2021; 130(07/08): 330-335
DOI: 10.1055/a-1539-0810
Fortbildung

Ein Update zur Genauigkeit von Implantatabformungen – konventionell vs. digital

Alexander Schmidt
,
Peter Engelbert Rein
,
Maximiliane Amelie Schlenz
,
Bernd Wöstmann
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Der vorliegende Beitrag gibt eine Übersicht zu aktuellen Möglichkeiten und Grenzen konventioneller und digitaler Implantatabformungen in klinischer Anwendung. Auf der Basis einer klinischen Studie werden Aussagen über mögliche Anwendungs- und Behandlungsempfehlungen gegeben. Der Leser sollte mögliche Indikationen zur Verwendung der unterschiedlichen Abformmethoden erfahren und Kontraindikationen bei der Abformung von Implantaten kennen.

Schlüsselwörter

Implantatabformung - Intraoralscanner - Digitale Zahnheilkunde - CAD/CAM - Digitale Abformung


Publication History

Article published online:
06 August 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Patzelt SB, Bahat O, Reynolds MA. et al. The all-on-four treatment concept: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014; 16 (06) 836-855
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Abduo J, Bennani V, Waddell N. et al. Assessing the fit of implant fixed prostheses: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010; 25 (03) 506-515
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Katsoulis J, Takeichi T, Sol Gaviria A. et al. Misfit of implant prostheses and its impact on clinical outcomes. Definition, assessment and a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Oral Implantol 2017; 10 (Suppl. 01) 121-138
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chang PK, Chen YC, Huang CC. et al. Distribution of micromotion in implants and alveolar bone with different thread profiles in immediate loading: a finite element study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27 (06) e96-e101
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Winter W, Klein D, Karl M. Effect of model parameters on finite element analysis of micromotions in implant dentistry. J Oral Implantol 2013; 39 (01) 23-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Winter W, Klein D, Karl M. Micromotion of Dental Implants: Basic Mechanical Considerations. J Med Eng 2013; 2013: 265412 DOI: 10.1155/2013/265412.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 de Franca DG, Morais MH, das Neves FD. et al. Influence of CAD/CAM on the fit accuracy of implant-supported zirconia and cobalt-chromium fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2015; 113 (01) 22-28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G. et al. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health 2017; 17 (01) 149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schmidt A, Häussling T, Rehmann P. et al. Accuracy of various impression materials and methods for two implant systems: An effect size study. J Prosthodont Res 2018; 62 (02) 245-251 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2017.10.004. (PMID: 29191609)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wulfman C, Naveau A, Rignon-Bret C. Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2019; DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.014. (PMID: 31757443)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Weigel C, Brägger U, Sutter F. et al. [Prosthodontics on implants. Crown and bridge prosthodontics with new solid secondary parts of the ITI Dental Implant System. Internationales Team fur Implantologie]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 1994; 104 (06) 756-769
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Park S, Kang HC, Lee J. et al. An enhanced method for registration of dental surfaces partially scanned by a 3D dental laser scanning. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2015; 118 (01) 11-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Güth JF, Edelhoff D, Schweiger J. et al. A new method for the evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in vitro. Clin Oral Investig 2016; 20 (07) 1487-1494 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1626-x. (PMID: 26454734)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Keul C, Güth JF. Accuracy of full-arch digital impressions: An in vitro and in vivo comparison. Clin Oral Investig 2020; 24 (02) 735-745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kuhr F, Schmidt A, Rehmann P. et al. A new method for assessing the accuracy of full arch impressions in patients. J Dent 2016; 55: 68-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Schmidt A, Klussmann L, Wöstmann B. et al. Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update. J Clin Med 2020; 9 (03) 688 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9030688. (PMID: 32143433)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Müller P, Ender A, Joda T. et al. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. Quintessence Int 2016; 47 (04) 343-349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Schmidt A, Billig JW, Schlenz MA. et al. A new 3D-method to assess the inter implant dimensions in patients – A pilot study. J Clin Exp Dent 2020; 12 (02) e187-e192 DOI: 10.4317/jced.56557. (PMID: 32071701)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ender A, Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. Int J Comput Dent 2019; 22 (01) 11-19
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Effect of Software Version on the Accuracy of an Intraoral Scanning Device. Int J Prosthodont 2018; 31 (04) 375-376 DOI: 10.11607/ijp.5781. (PMID: 29624626)
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar