PURPOSE: This study examined the effect of gingival sulcular width, in the presence of an undercut, on the accuracy of dies poured from impressions made with different impression materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three polyvinyl siloxanes (Examix, Elite, and Express), one polyether (Permadyne), and one polysulfide (Permlastic) were used to make impressions of six metal dies. The dies were machined to simulate teeth with a chamfer preparation, root convergence, and sulci of varying widths (0.10 to 0.40 mm). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the resulting dies were measured under a traveling microscope at the level of the finish line. The distortion of each die was calculated. RESULTS: The distortion ranged from 0.01% to 0.89%. All materials showed similar behavior: At the narrowest sulcular width (0.10 mm), the distortion was considerably larger (0.43% to 0.89%) than at the wider sulci (up to 0.20% in most cases). Examix (polyvinyl siloxane), Permlastic (polysulfide), and Permadyne (polyether) gave the most accurate dies for sulci 0.15 mm and wider. Express (polyvinyl siloxane) showed greater deformation than other materials in most sulcular widths under the conditions of this study. CONCLUSION: Accurate impressions can be expected in sulci > or = 0.15 mm in width at the level of the finish line coronal to an undercut. Impressions with 0.10-mm sulci widths are not predictable. The physical properties of the impression materials used cannot be anticipated based on their chemical group.
PURPOSE: This study examined the effect of gingival sulcular width, in the presence of an undercut, on the accuracy of dies poured from impressions made with different impression materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three polyvinyl siloxanes (Examix, Elite, and Express), one polyether (Permadyne), and one polysulfide (Permlastic) were used to make impressions of six metal dies. The dies were machined to simulate teeth with a chamfer preparation, root convergence, and sulci of varying widths (0.10 to 0.40 mm). The impressions were poured with type IV stone, and the resulting dies were measured under a traveling microscope at the level of the finish line. The distortion of each die was calculated. RESULTS: The distortion ranged from 0.01% to 0.89%. All materials showed similar behavior: At the narrowest sulcular width (0.10 mm), the distortion was considerably larger (0.43% to 0.89%) than at the wider sulci (up to 0.20% in most cases). Examix (polyvinyl siloxane), Permlastic (polysulfide), and Permadyne (polyether) gave the most accurate dies for sulci 0.15 mm and wider. Express (polyvinyl siloxane) showed greater deformation than other materials in most sulcular widths under the conditions of this study. CONCLUSION: Accurate impressions can be expected in sulci > or = 0.15 mm in width at the level of the finish line coronal to an undercut. Impressions with 0.10-mm sulci widths are not predictable. The physical properties of the impression materials used cannot be anticipated based on their chemical group.