J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111

DOI 10.1007/s13191-010-0020-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

A Systematic Review of Impression Technique for Conventional

Complete Denture
Shubha Rao • R. Chowdhary • S. Mahoorkar

Received: 13 March 2010 / Accepted: 3 August 2010 / Published online: 17 December 2010
! Indian Prosthodontic Society 2010

Abstract The importance of an in depth review of historical value of all the factors related to physical, biologic
impression making for complete dentures lies in the and behavioral areas and the time in which they were dis-
assessment of the historical value of all the factors related cussed and taught as well [1]. This review documents the
to physical, biologic and behavioral areas and the time in historical development of knowledge associated with scien-
which they were discussed and taught as well. This review tific evolution from 1845 to the present year i.e. 2009 related to
documents the historical development of knowledge asso- impression procedures in complete denture prosthesis.
ciated with scientific advancement from 1845 to the present Electronic Search Engine the Pubmed was used as the
year, i.e. 2009 related to impression procedures in con- source of articles for this review.
ventional complete denture prosthesis. Search for articles
was done through electronic media the Pubmed.
Literature Review
Keywords Impression techniques ! Conventional
complete dentures ! Evolution of impression making !
Review of literature was done by Zinner and Sherman in
Advances in impression making
1981 assuming that any important technique/theory of
impression making published in dental journal is eventu-
ally published in a textbook [1].
Introduction
Analysis of history on complete denture impression
making can be done era wise i.e. from 1845 to 2009. Prior
History of impression making for complete denture dates back
to 1600 era, complete denture replacement were not made
to the era, when wood or ivory blocks were carved to
due to lack of understanding of retention and replacement.
accommodate the intra oral contours. More advanced tech-
The various developments found in literature are summa-
niques have come into use today and this is because of a
rized as follows.
thorough knowledge of the oral tissues, their behavior and
their reaction to manipulation for making impressions. The – Ivory and wooden teeth were mounted on gold plate.
advancement in the impression techniques promotes the need – Ancient Egyptians (300 BC) wired artificial anterior
for new impression materials and sometimes, development of teeth for esthetics.
new material leading to an improved impression technique. – Till eighteenth century, teeth and bones of cattle and
The importance of an in-depth review of impression ivory were used to make prostheses.
making for complete dentures lies in the assessment of the – In 1711, Matthias Gottfried Purman recorded use of
wax.
– In 1728, Pierre Fauchard made dentures by measuring
S. Rao ! R. Chowdhary (&) ! S. Mahoorkar mouth with compasses and cutting bone to approximate
Department of Prosthodontics, shape for the space to be filled.
S. Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Sciences,
Gulbarga 585102, India – In 1736, Phillip Pfaff of Germany used plaster casts and
e-mail: [email protected] described a procedure for recording maxillomandibular

123
106 J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111

relations. Impressions of half of the mouth at a time as the patient functioned, the denture would move
were made with wax. forward and returning the tissue to their normal stage.
– In 1844, Plaster of Paris was first used as an impression 2. Hypertrophied tissue should be recorded in its passive
material, the credit for which goes to three dentists— form.
Westcott, Dwinelle and Dunning.
Various methods were described for border molding
– In 1848, gutta percha was first introduced which was
[7, 8].
placed in boiling water, kneaded and molded same way
as wax and immediately inserted firmly into mouth [2]. a. Sucking and swallowing action.
b. Moving peripheral musculature in direction of the
attachment, which resulted in occlusion of the muco-
buccal fold both in height and width by the denture
1845–1900
borders. It was considered biologically sound and
within limits of muscle function.
Basic principles of complete denture impression making
c. Moving peripheral musculature in opposite direction of
were introduced in the middle of nineteenth century which
attachment which caused foreshortening of final den-
were
ture borders.
a. Concepts of atmospheric pressure.
Concept, location and placement of posterior border seal
b. Maximum extension of denture bearing area.
for complete maxillary denture was considered on anatomic
c. Equal distribution of pressure.
as well as mechanical basis. Various considerations were:
d. Adaptation of denture bearing tissues [2–4].
1. Extending PPS !th inch beyond the vibrating line
Earlier single impression was thought sufficient for
when upper anterior tissue was displaceable.
fabrication of complete denture. But in this era, preliminary
2. Ending posterior denture border at fovea palatine.
impression of gutta percha, beeswax or modelling com-
3. Ending PPS at vibrating line of the palate which
pound was followed by a secondary wash impression made
continues till today [9].
of plaster within the preliminary impression [3, 4]. Ana-
tomic considerations was given emphasis for the functions Most important biologic concept introduced in this era was
of retention, stability and comfort of complete denture. an awareness of oral and perioral muscle as related to borders
Tissue behavior and the effects of impression making on of complete denture impressions. There was an attempt to
tissue was not considered. Open mouth method of relate borders and denture—bearing tissues to denture func-
impression technique was used in this period. Border tion. Shift from purely mechanical technique of denture
molding varied from pulling the cheeks downward to construction to biologic/biomechanical concept took place.
having the patient move the cheeks in a downward direc- Modeling compound was used for primary impression, plaster
tion [5, 6]. Evolution of impression trays took place during for final impression within the primary impression or within a
this era in order to carry the impression material [7]. custom tray made of metal, vulcanite or base plate. Concept of
esthetics in impression making was introduced [7].

1900–1929
1930–1950
In this era accuracy was given importance. Closed mouth
impression technique was introduced [8]. Release/escape This era recognized the anatomy of the denture bearing
vents within the final impression trays to prevent build up of area and muscle physiology as related to impression pro-
excessive pressures was advocated [6, 7]. Rebase impres- cedures. There was greater knowledge of muscle anatomy,
sions were called as impression of secondary type using a physiology and its effects upon dentures. Border molding
free flowing material which compensates for changes in the was stressed by moving peripheral musculature in the
tissues and were made within an existing denture or base direction of its fibres [10]. Need to cover retro molar pad
plate. Proper denture extension through various methods of completely for stability was stressed [11]. Emphasis given
border molding to capture/record the anatomy of tissues for immediate denture impression techniques not only for
contiguous to denture borders was introduced. esthetics but also for maintenance of muscle tonicity in the
Two techniques were developed for recording the flabby peri oral musculature [12].
maxillary ridge. New impression materials were introduced like,
1. Compressive compound impression technique, which a. Reversible hydrocolloid
displaced the flabby ridge palatally. Rationale was that, b. Zinc oxide–Eugenol

123
J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111 107

c. Zinc oxide–oil of cloves. from impressions of impression compound. This study

conducted for 2 years showed that inflamed areas and
Modeling compound and plaster remained the two major
hypertrophied tissues were seen with pressure impressions,
impression materials for primary and final impression pro-
while dentures with alginate impression had no tissue
cedures. Construction of an individual tray from a cast of
breakdown even when duplication was necessary after
preliminary impression was emphasized and final impres-
2 years [17].
sion made in this individual/customized tray. Relationship
In 1956, two impression techniques were described.
of mandibular posture with impression procedure was rec-
ognized. Closed mouth procedure at correct vertical (a) Technique for unfavorable mandibular ridges where
dimension of occlusion in centric relation was advocated the oral tissues have lost the ability to adjust to the
[13]. Emphasis was placed more upon making impression of unfavorable situation. This technique makes the
displaceable tissue in its passive state. Concept of muco- impression in three stages [18].
static was introduced in this era wherein the best possible (b) Minimum pressure complete denture impression
adaptation of impression material to tissues to capture them technique is applicable to any type of ridge form.
in their passive undistorted form was emphasized. Injection method is used to provide relief for hard
areas in the mouth for both maxilla and mandible.
Lower impression is made with slight movement of
1950–2009 the tongue and borders are developed such that it does
not interfere with normal movements [19].
Emphasis was given on the biologic factors affecting
In 1963, physiologic complete denture impression
complete denture impression making i.e. on flanges, border
technique was described where Tench’s neuromuscular
molding and denture extensions. More attention was given
concept was used for making complete denture impres-
to posterior palatal seal area and to esthetics. There was
sions. It involves the function of sucking and swallowing to
greater understanding of properties of various materials
develop
used in complete denture impression like plaster, modeling
compound and materials used for impression trays. Prop- – Complete passive contact of all impression borders to
erties of zinc oxide eugenol impression paste and its the basal seat tissues.
reaction with tissues was better understood [14]. – Passively fill all marginal spaces.
In 1951, attempt was made to classify various impres- – Basal seat coverage that is compatible with function
sion techniques based on contemporary literature and [20].
observation of impression procedures. The classification
In 1966, two techniques were described
developed was as follows:
a. Impression by use of sub atmospheric pressure (also
a. Use of actual anatomy of the individual patient or
called as vacustatic technique): It obtains an accurate
arbitrary landmark.
vertical and lateral record of the tissues through the
b. Mouth position while impression making (closed/
application of controlled pressure. The difference
open-mouth).
between sub atmospheric pressure within the tray and
c. Relative amount of pressure exerted on the tissues by
sub atmospheric pressure outside the tray, seats the
the impression material. (Pressure, non-pressure, neg-
tray centrally over the basal seat which retains it in a
ative pressure/selected pressure) [15].
static position. A measured volume i.e. 10 inches of
Chester and Boles in 1957 described an impression vacuum is established in the space between the tray
procedure, balanced semi static impression procedure and the denture base tissues. The impression material
wherein the anterior and lateral walls of the palate were in a fluid state flows from the border region into the
considered as the primary stress bearing area instead of space and covers the basal seat tissues evenly thus
alveolar ridge as it is always remodeled after loss of teeth recording the shape of the tissues without distortion or
while the palate is maintained the same from birth with no strain following Pascal’s law of hydraulics [21].
changes after loss of teeth. It is considered for a normal b. Flange technique: This technique involves making of
healthy edentulous maxilla and can be used with any other impression of the soft structures adjacent to buccal,
technique. It is indicated especially for roofless/closed labial, lingual and palatal surfaces of dentures and
palate dentures [16]. incorporating the resulting extensions into denture
In 1952, alginate impression technique was described, a construction. These extensions are described as flanges
non pressure type of impression. Dentures made from this or flange modifications it increases the area of intimate
type of impression were compared with dentures made contact of the denture with the oral structures thus

123
108 J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111

improving stability, function, comfort and appearance completed. Location of two halves of the impression
of complete dentures over other techniques [22]. is refined for an accurate cast on which denture can be
constructed.
In 1971, a modified impression technique for hyperplastic
4. For maxillary surgical defects where preliminary
alveolar ridges was described where surgical preparation
impression is made using modified stock tray with
was contraindicated. This was done in two steps where two
modeling compound in defect area. Impression is
cold cure acrylic trays were prepared on relieved primary
completed with alginate [25].
casts. Keys were prepared in one of the trays, numerous holes
were made in the second tray and fitting into keyed position. In 1979, dynamic impression technique was described
After border molding, base plate wax was removed and which is based on the assumption that every patient has a
flanges were reduced 1–2 mm with exception over tuberos- steady and characteristic oral functional pattern. The ana-
ities and posterior palatal seal area. Light body material was tomic functional reproduction of the ridge and the tissues
used for initial tray as corrective wash material and excess requires the knowledge of the space to be occupied by the
removed. Second impression was made with second tray denture i.e. neutral zone. Recording of neutral zone should
until the keyed parts were in contact. After the material was be reproducible under standardized condition resulting in
set impression was removed as a whole unit [23]. approximate basic form which was confirmed by a study
In 1972, applied plaster impression technique for max- conducted by Beresin and Schiesser [26].
illary complete denture was described. It is applicable in In 1979, a study was conducted to determine if clinical
cases of combination syndrome wherein the soft tissue of differences exist between two different denture techniques.
anterior part of the maxillary ridge is soft and movable and Rate of residual ridge resorption were determined for
should be recorded in undistorted state. Placement of patients wearing dentures made by two techniques:
impression tray in mouth causes distortion of such mobile
a. Complex—which involved location of true hinge axis
tissues and hence plaster is applied directly to the tissues.
for facebow transfer to mount upper cast on a semi
Vibrating line is marked with indelible pencil on the palate
adjustable articulator, lower cast in centric relation
of the patient and plaster is applied in thin layer with gauze
records and occlusal corrections are made on articulator.
pieces. A wooden tongue blade is used to stabilize the
b. Standard—arbitrary mounting of upper cast, lower cast
plaster soaked gauze pieces. Once it sets another layer of
in centric relation, teeth arranged in tight centric
plaster is applied. Cellophane cone is made and plaster put
occlusion. After processing, occlusal corrections made
in it, tip is cut and plaster is squeezed layer wise in ves-
on articulator, placed in mouth and further occlusal
tibular areas. About 6–7 layers of plaster is applied. Blast
corrections done.
of air into vestibular space aids in removal of the impres-
sion. Cast is poured [24]. Cephalographs showed no statically significant differ-
In 1973, composite impression procedure was intro- ences between the two groups [27].
duced. Different materials are used according to local In 1992, an alternative impression technique was pre-
indications. They are used where large impressions are sented by Goldstein for extremely mobile teeth utilizing
difficult or impossible to obtain with a single tray. This amalgam condensers. Apically applied pressure on the
procedure is applied in four techniques which are mobile teeth minimizes the risk of accidental tooth
extraction during impression removal [28].
1. For edentulous ridges where mucosa displaced impres-
In 2002, a study was conducted on the effect of three
sion of the healthy denture bearing tissue is obtained
impression techniques on complete denture retention in
with zinc oxide eugenol paste in a custom tray without
mandibular flat ridge case.
spacer. Undisplaced fibrous soft tissue is recorded with
impression plaster in a second tray of cold cure resin 1st technique—Zinc oxide euginal paste (ZnO-E)
over the first tray. pressure impression (open mouth)
2. For immediate denture where impression of the tissues 2nd technique—ZnO-E pressure impression (closed
is obtained with controlled mucosal displacement mouth)
(ZnO-E paste) and borders are molded under con- 3rd technique—functional and anatomic impression
trolled condition (alginate). using tissue conditioner and rubber base material. The
3. In cases of restricted access where principle of split study concluded that mandibular denture bases con-
tray is used. Preliminary impression with modeling structed from closed mouth technique were more
compound using sectional stock tray is made, impres- retentive than the other two techniques [29].
sion of one side of jaw is extended across the central
In 2003, a study compared the number of post insertion
line, cast is poured, overlap region is located in
adjustment visits required by patients with dentures made
impression of the other side and cast of jaw is

123
J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111 109

from border molded definitive impression using modeling A study was conducted in 2006 to assess whether simple
plastic impression compound (traditional technique) and complete denture techniques can provide patient satisfac-
with patients whose dentures were made from border tion where patients were randomly divided into two groups
molded definitive impressions using heavy body vinyl to receive dentures using traditional and simplified tech-
polysiloxane impression material. No significant difference niques. In traditional group, final impression was made in
was found [29]. custom-made tray; face-bow recording and semi-adjustable
In 2003, a survey was conducted on complete denture articulator was used with articulator remount after inser-
final impression to identify impression philosophies, tech- tion. In simplified group, impressions were made in stock
nique and materials used in United States dental schools. trays, no face-bow recording and a monoplane articulator
The survey showed that was used with no articulator remount after insertion. The
results supported the use of simplified technique which was
1. Selective pressure technique was used for making
easier to master and reduced treatment costs [34].
final impressions of edentulous arches.
In 2008, Dr. Joseph Massad described an impression
Common techniques used were technique which involves the layering method of impres-
sion making that maintains the integrity between layers of
a. Boucher’s technique—1 mm wax relief is given over
the impression materials of varying viscosities and controls
the entire basal area of the custom tray, tray is trimmed
the path of insertion thus minimizing the incidence of
2–3 mm short of the peripheral extensions, border
overextension [35].
molding is done, periphery is again trimmed 1 mm
In 2009, Fraser McCord listed studies done by El
short, wax removed to provide space for wash
Khartia regarding the technical aspects of complete denture
impression material.
fabrication. Earlier versions of injection-molded systems to
b. Halperian’s technique—1 mm relief wax over the
process acrylic resin-based dentures were perceived to be
peripheral extensions of the custom tray.
less consistent than conventional compression-molded
Tray in intimate contact with basal seat areas forms a techniques. Recent studies, however, have indicated that
butt joint from the peripheral wax for border molding complete dentures processed by twenty-first century
completion. Master cast is directly poured into the border injection molding techniques exhibited greater accuracy
molded tray without wash impression. and dimensional stability than those processed via standard
compression processing. El-Khartia carried out a study to
2. Use of plastic molding impression compound for
determine if the processing technique in any way influ-
border molding.
3. Use of visible light cured composite resin material for enced the surface of acrylic denture bases. The study
custom tray. demonstrated that denture bases processed via the injection
4. Making vent holes in custom tray. technique exhibited a smoother surface than those pro-
5. Teaching open mouth impression technique [30]. cessed via a conventional processing technique. McCord
et al. sought to determine if the nature of the impression
In 2004, a study was conducted to compare the swal- material, used to record the mandibular definitive impres-
lowing and phonetic techniques for assessing the location sion, influenced the outcome of the treatment as measured
and shape of the neutral zone. Study showed that the by patient opinion. Three types of impression material were
phonetic neutral zone appeared to be narrower posteriorly used to record the definitive mandibular impression:
compared to the swallowing zone, thus limiting premolar
and molar positioning [31]. (1) A light-bodied poly (vinyl siloxane) material (Provil,
In 2005, a modified functional impression technique was Heraeus Kulzer, Dormagen, Germany).
described which used a removable functional acrylic resin (2) A two-paste system of zinc oxide eugenol (SS White
handle that was attached to custom impression trays Mfg., Gloucester, UK).
allowing an excellent peripheral sealing zone got by patient (3) An admix of impression compound and tracing
conducted muscular and jaw motion [32]. compound.
A survey conducted in 2005 of U.S. Prosthodontists and It was found:
dental schools on current materials and methods for final
impressions for complete denture prosthodontics found that (1) Dentures processed on casts poured into the zinc
there was a variation of the materials and techniques used oxide eugenol impression were never the denture that
for final impression. There was an increase in use of was most preferred and was least preferred in 8 out of
polyvinyl siloxane and polyether material for border 11 occasions.
molding procedures instead of the traditional green stick (2) Dentures processed on casts poured into the Admix
compound [33]. impression were the denture that was most preferred

123
110 J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111

in 7 of the 11 occasions and was least preferred on 1 Impressions were classified as pressure, non-pressure and
occasion. selective pressure. Stress bearing and non stress bearing
(3) Dentures processed on casts poured into the poly areas were differentiated. Selective pressure technique for
(vinyl siloxane) impression were the denture that was final impression which records stress bearing areas under
most preferred on three occasions and was least pressure and non stress bearing areas under minimum
preferred on two occasions. pressure gained importance. Relief was provided in final
impression in non stress bearing areas. This helped to
Clinicians do need to reflect on what impression mate-
maintain the health of tissues. Inflammation and hyper-
rial is used to record the mandibular impression, especially
trophy of tissues seen with mucocompressive technique
the atrophic mandible, if some degree of predictable suc-
was eliminated with selective impression technique. Dif-
cessful outcome is to be realized [36].
ferent technique for unusual conditions like excessively
resorbed ridges, flabby ridges, ridges with surgical defects,
restricted mouth opening were described. Levin, Boucher,
Discussion
Rudd and Morrow, Sharry advocated different spacer
designs to provide space for impression material.
Recording of denture bearing tissues for complete dentures
is important from many aspects like health of the tissues,
function and retention of dentures. Theories of impression
making have evolved through trial of variety of materials Conclusion
and methods. Introduction of new materials has lead to
evolution of newer techniques in impression making. Use Success of complete dentures largely depends on accuracy
of gutta percha, impression plaster, impression compound, of impression. Accurate impression needs a thorough
alginate and elastomeric impression material for making understanding of anatomy, physiology of supporting
primary impression has been quoted in literature of which structures, properties and manipulation of materials. This
gutta percha and plaster are no more in use because of review shows that a wide range of materials and techniques
manipulation difficulties. is available for different situations. Based on the particular
Initially tissues were recorded evenly irrespective of condition, dentist needs to select material and technique of
their anatomy and role played by them in retaining, sup- impression for success of complete denture therapy.
porting and stabilizing the dentures. All the tissues were
recorded under equal pressure (mucocompressive tech-
nique) which resulted in compromised health of tissues. No
technique was available for cases like atrophic ridges, References
flabby tissues.
In the second half of nineteenth century principles of 1. Zinner ID, Sherman H (1981) An analysis of the development of
impression making which took into consideration the complete denture impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent
46(3):242–249
atmospheric pressure, extension, adaptation and distribu- 2. Harris CA (1845) The principles and practice of dental surgery,
tion of pressure were introduced. Open mouth impression 2nd edn, part 6. Lindsay & Blackiston, Philadelphia
was the technique of choice. Although anatomy was con- 3. White JW (1895) Taking impressions of the mouth, 2nd edn. S. S.
sidered, tissue behaviour was not given importance. White Dental Mfg. Co., Philadelphia
4. Essig GJ (1896) The American textbook of prosthetic dentistry.
During early twentieth century, shift from mechanical to Lea Brothers and Co., Philadelphia
bio-mechanical concept of denture construction was seen. 5. Richardson JA (1860) Practical treatise on mechanical dentistry.
Importance of posterior palatal seal area in the retention of Lindsay & Blackiston, Philadelphia
maxillary denture was identified. Also the concept of 6. Turner CR (1932) The American textbook of prosthetic dentistry.
Lea & Febiger Co., Philadelphia
esthetics in impression was introduced. As the knowledge 7. Campbell DD (1924) Full denture prosthesis. The C. V. Mosby
regarding muscle anatomy, physiology and their role in the Co., St. Louis
success of denture grew, need to record the borders was 8. Lieberthal RH (1919) Advanced impression taking. Professional
stressed. Alginate and zinc oxide eugenol were introduced Publishing Co., New York
9. Wilson GH (1917) A manual of dental prosthesis. Lea and
and closed mouth technique was advocated. The disad- Febiger, New York
vantages of closed mouth technique are that it requires 10. Craddock FW (1951) Prosthetic dentistry; a clinical outline. C. V.
construction of occlusal rims or interim dentures. Mosby Company, St. Louis
A major transformation in impressions began in mid 11. Swenson MG (1940) Complete dentures. C. V. Mosby Company,
St. Louis
twentieth century when material properties and biologic 12. Boyle HH (1936) The principles and practice of applied dental
factors affecting the impression were better understood. aesthetics. Henry Kimpton, London

123
J Indian Prosthodont Soc (Apr-June 2010) 10(2):105–111 111

13. Doxtater LW (1936) Full and partial denture prosthesis. Dental 27. Nicol BR, Somes GW, Ellinger CW, Unger JW, Fuhrmann J
Items of Interest Publishing Company, Brooklyn (1979) Patient response to variation in denture techniques, part II:
14. Lammie GA (1956) Full dentures. Blackwell, Oxford 5-year cephalometric evaluation. J Prosthet Dent 41(4):368–372
15. Boucher CO (1951) A critical analysis of mid-century impression 28. Goldstien GR (1992) An alternative immediate complete denture
techniques for complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1(4):472–491 impression technique. J Prosthet Dent 67(6):892–893
16. Gobby AF (1951) An impression procedure. J Prosthet Dent 29. Drago CJ (2003) A retrospective comparison of two definitive
1(6):648–661 impression techniques and their associated post insertion adjust-
17. Denen HH (1952) Impression for full dentures. J Prosthet Dent ments in complete denture prosthodontics. J Prosthodont
2(6):737–745 12(3):192–197
18. Freese AS (1956) Impression for unfavorable mandibular ridges. 30. Vicki CP (2003) Current concepts and techniques in complete
J Prosthet Dent 6(3):302–304 denture final impression procedures. J Prosthodont 12(4):
19. Tilton EG (1956) A minimal pressure complete denture impres- 280–287
sion technique. J Prosthet Dent 6(1):6–23 31. Joseph EM (2004) Morphologic comparison of two neutral zone
20. Barone VJ (1963) Physiologic complete denture impressions. impression techniques; a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 92:563–568
J Prosthet Dent 13(5):800–809 32. Alexandre M et al (2005) Modified functional impression tech-
21. Kubalek MV, Buffington BC (1966) Impressions by the use of nique for complete dentures. Braz Dent J 16(2):135–139
subatmospheric pressure. J Prosthet Dent 6(2):213–223 33. Cynthia SP (2005) A survey of U.S. prosthodontists and dental
22. Lott F, Levin B (1966) Flange technique: an anatomic and schools on the current materials and methods for final impres-
physiologic approach to increased retention, function, comfort, sions for complete denture prosthodontics. J Prosthodont
and appearance of dentures. J Prosthet Dent 16(3):394–413 14(4):253–262
23. William HF (1971) Modified impression technique for hyper- 34. Robert J (2006) Simple complete denture techniques can provide
plastic alveolar ridges. J Prosthet Dent 25(6):609–612 patient satisfaction. Evidence-Based Dent 7(1):12
24. Robert GV, Roland CS (1972) Applied plaster impressions for 35. Massad JJ (2008) Complete denture prosthodontics: modern
maxillary complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 27(6):586–590 approaches to old concerns. Inside Dent 4(8):2–6
25. John DW (1973) Composite impression procedures. J Prosthet 36. Fraser JM (2009) Contemporary techniques for denture fabrica-
Dent 30(4):385–390 tion. J Prosthodont 18(2):106–111
26. Stig K, Bjorn H (1979) A study of reproducibility of functional
denture space with dynamic impression technique. J Prosthet
Dent 41(1):21–25

123