Article Sidebar

Submitted
15 December 2024
Accepted
18 December 2024
Published
21 December 2024
Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 82 Download : 38

Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the surface details reproduction of hydrophilic Polyvinyl Siloxane, Polyether and Vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression materials in both dry and wet conditions. Methods: A total of 42 impression specimens were made using a standardized stainless steel test block according to ADA specification No. 19 for elastomeric dental impression materials and divided into 3 study groups (I, II & III) according to the impression material used, 14 for each, each group was further divided into 2 subgroups (A & B) for the dry and wet conditions respectively. Surface details reproduction for each specimen was evaluated by two examiners visually using an ×10 magnifier to confirm the presence of the 0.020 mm ruled line. Results: For the specimens made in the dry conditions and when comparing using Chi-Square test for statistical analysis, it was found that there were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) among all the groups, while for the specimens made in the wet conditions and when comparing between each two groups it was found that there were statistically significant differences at (P ≤ 0.05) between surface details reproduction of groups I & II (P1= 0.005) and also between groups II & III (P2 =  0.031) but there were no significant differences between groups I & III (P1 = 0.299). Conclusions: Vinyl Siloxanether (VSE), Polyvinyl Siloxane (PVS), and Polyether can effectively reproduce surface details according to international standards but for challenging moisture control situations, VSE and Polyether are preferred due to their hydrophilic properties.

Keywords

Elastomeric impression materials Vinyl siloxanether Surface details reproduction

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Contemporary Dental Sciences

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Barakat, D. A. M. (2024). Surface details reproduction of impression materials in dry and wet conditions. Journal of Contemporary Dental Sciences, 1(2), 8–13. Retrieved from https://jcds.qu.edu.sa/index.php/JCDS/article/view/2359
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. McCabe JF, Carrick TE. Recording surface detail on moist surfaces with elastomeric impression materials. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2006;14:42-6.
  2. Chiaraputt S, Chokwattanapornchai N, Limchaikul K, Paisarnkobrit V, Sriamporn T. Effect of gingival hemostatic agents on the surface detail reproduction and dimension stability of three elastomeric impression materials. Int J Dent 2023;2023:6660721.
  3. Ali KS, Shenoy VK, Rodrigues SJ. Comparative evaluation of dimensional accuracy of casts made by repeated pouring of addition siliconeimpressions using 1) Two-step putty/light-body technique using stock tray and 2) One-step simultaneousdual viscosity technique using custom tray: An in vitro study. J Nepal Dent Assoc 2010;11:32-9.
  4. McCabe JF, Walls AW, editors. Applied dental materials. United States: John Wiley & Sons; 2013. p. 163-77.
  5. Nayyar AS. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of hydrophilic polyvinylsiloxane impression material tested under dry and moist salivary conditions: An: in vitro: Study. Biomed Biotechnol Res J 2021;5:59-63.
  6. Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR, editors. Phillips’ science of dental materials. Netherlands: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2012.
  7. Takahashi H, Finger WJ. Dentin surface reproduction with hydrophilic and hydrophobic impression materials. Dent Mater 1991;7:197-201.
  8. Tolidis K, Tortopidis D, Gerasimou P, Theocharidou A, Boutsiouki C. Comparison of elastomeric impression materials’ thixotropic behavior. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2013;21:75-8.
  9. American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association. Specification No. 19: Dental elastometric impression materials. Chicago: American Dental Association; 2004.
  10. Aiasha T, Kumar S, Savadi RC. Evaluation and comparison of surface detail reproduction of different elastomeric impression materials under dry and wet conditions. Trends Prosthodont Dent Implantol 2010;1:5-8.
  11. Gerrow JD, Price RB. Comparison of the surface detail reproduction of flexible die material systems. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:485-9.
  12. Chee WW, Donovan TE. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: A review of properties and techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:728-32.
  13. Keyf F. Some properties of elastomeric impression materials used in fixed prosthodontics. J Islamic Acad Sci 1994;7:44-8.
  14. Lee EA. Impression material selection in contemporary fixed prosthodontics: Technique, rationale, and indications. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005;26:780-9.
  15. Walker MP, Petrie CS, Haj‐Ali R, Spencer P, Dumas C, Williams K. Moisture effect on polyether and polyvinylsiloxane dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction. J Prosthodont 2005;14:158-63.
  16. Johnson GH, Lepe X, Aw TC. The effect of surface moisture on detail reproduction of elastomeric impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:354-64.
  17. Petrie CS, Walker MP, O’mahony AM, Spencer P. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under dry, moist, and wet conditions. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:365-72.
  18. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Impression materials: Effect of hydrophilicity and viscosity on ability to displace water from dentin surfaces. Eur J Oral Sci 1988;96:253-9.
  19. Katyayan PA, Kalavathy N, Katyayan M. Dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under different conditions. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22:881-2.
  20. Firtell DN, Koumjian JH. Mandibular complete denture impressions with fluid wax or polysulfide rubber: A comparative study. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:801-4.
  21. Boening KW, Walter MH, Schuette U. Clinical significance of surface activation of silicone impression materials. J Dent 1998;26:447-