Document Type: Original Article


1 Dept. of Prosthodontics, Dental Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.


3 Dental Student, Dental Branch, Islamic Azad University. Tehran, Iran.

4 Post Graduate Student, Dept. of Radiology, Dental Faculty, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

5 Post Graduate Student, Dept. of Prosthodontics, Dental Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.


Statement of Problem: Various impression techniques have different effects on the accuracy of final cast dimensions. Meanwhile; there are some controversies about the best technique.Purpose: This study was performed to compare two kinds of implant impression methods (open tray and closed tray) on 15 degree angled implants.Materials and Method: In this experimental study, a steel model with 8 cm in diameter and 3 cm in height were produced with 3 holes devised inside  to stabilize 3 implants. The central implant was straight and the other two implants were 15° angled. The two angled implants had 5 cm distance from each other and 3.5 cm from the central implant. Dental stone, high strength (type IV) was used for the main casts. Impression trays were filled with poly ether, and then the two impression techniques (open tray and closed tray) were compared. To evaluate positions of the implants, each cast was analyzed by CMM device in 3 dimensions (x,y,z). Differences in the measurements obtained from final casts and laboratory model were analyzed using t-Test.Results: The obtained results indicated that closed tray impression technique was significantly different in dimensional accuracy when compared with open tray method. Dimensional changes were 129 ± 37μ and 143.5 ± 43.67μ in closed tray and open tray, while coefficient of variation in closed- tray and open tray were reported to be 27.2% and 30.4%, respectively.Conclusion: Closed impression technique had less dimensional changes in comparison with open tray method, so this study suggests that closed tray impression technique is more accurate.