Literature DB >> 25083032

In vivo Study of the Accuracy of Dual-arch Impressions.

Luciana Martinelli Santayana de Lima1, Gilberto Antonio Borges2, Luiz Henrique Burnett Junior3, Ana Maria Spohr4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated in vivo the accuracy of metal (Smart®) and plastic (Triple Tray®) dual-arch trays used with vinyl polysiloxane (Flexitime®), in the putty/wash viscosity, as well as polyether (Impregum Soft®) in the regular viscosity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In one patient, an implant-level transfer was screwed on an implant in the mandibular right first molar, serving as a pattern. Ten impressions were made with each tray and impression material. The impressions were poured with Type IV gypsum. The width and height of the pattern and casts were measured in a profile projector (Nikon). The results were submitted to Student's t-test for one sample (α = 0.05).
RESULTS: For the width distance, the plastic dual-arch trays with vinyl polysiloxane (4.513 mm) and with polyether (4.531 mm) were statistically wider than the pattern (4.489 mm). The metal dual-arch tray with vinyl polysiloxane (4.504 mm) and with polyether (4.500 mm) did not differ statistically from the pattern. For the height distance, only the metal dual-arch tray with polyether (2.253 mm) differed statistically from the pattern (2.310 mm).
CONCLUSION: The metal dual-arch tray with vinyl polysiloxane, in the putty/wash viscosities, reproduced casts with less distortion in comparison with the same technique with the plastic dual-arch tray. The plastic or metal dual-arch trays with polyether reproduced cast with greater distortion. How to cite the article: Santayana de Lima LM, Borges GA, Burnett LH Jr, Spohr AM. In vivo study of the accuracy of dual-arch impressions. J Int Oral Health 2014;6(3):50-5.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Impression material; polyether; tray; vinyl polysiloxane

Year:  2014        PMID: 25083032      PMCID: PMC4109244     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Int Oral Health        ISSN: 0976-1799


  33 in total

1.  The accuracy of dual-arch impressions: a pilot study.

Authors:  Trevor D Larson; Mark A Nielsen; William W Brackett
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.426

2.  Mechanical properties of 3 hydrophilic addition silicone and polyether elastomeric impression materials.

Authors:  Huan Lu; Belinda Nguyen; John M Powers
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.426

3.  Accuracy of impressions obtained with dual-arch trays.

Authors:  Bernd Wöstmann; Peter Rehmann; Markus Balkenhol
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  2009 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.681

4.  Dual-arch and custom tray impression accuracy.

Authors:  R D Davis; R S Schwartz
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 1.522

5.  Marginal adaptation of castings made with dual-arch and custom trays.

Authors:  R Davis; R Schwartz; T Hilton
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 1.522

6.  Comparison of conventional paint-on die spacers and those used with the all-ceramic restorations.

Authors:  S D Campbell
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.426

7.  Double arch impressions for simplified restorative dentistry.

Authors:  E G Wilson; S R Werrin
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 3.426

8.  Dimensional accuracy of a new polyether impression material.

Authors:  Tatsuo Endo; Werner J Finger
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.677

9.  Accuracy of casts generated from dual-arch impressions.

Authors:  L C Breeding; D L Dixon
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.426

10.  The effect of surface moisture on detail reproduction of elastomeric impressions.

Authors:  Glen H Johnson; Xavier Lepe; Tar Chee Aw
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.426

View more
  5 in total

1.  In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions.

Authors:  Andreas Ender; Moritz Zimmermann; Thomas Attin; Albert Mehl
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-11-07       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Impression Techniques Used for Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Michael S McCracken; David R Louis; Mark S Litaker; Helena M Minyé; Thomas Oates; Valeria V Gordan; Don G Marshall; Cyril Meyerowitz; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  J Prosthodont       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 2.752

3.  Impression evaluation and laboratory use for single-unit crowns: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Michael S McCracken; Mark S Litaker; Ashley J George; Scott Durand; Sepideh Malekpour; Don G Marshall; Cyril Meyerowitz; Lauren Carter; Valeria V Gordan; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 3.634

4.  Evaluation of surface detail reproduction, dimensional stability and gypsum compatibility of monophase polyvinyl-siloxane and polyether elastomeric impression materials under dry and moist conditions.

Authors:  Sriharsha Babu Vadapalli; Kaleswararao Atluri; Madhu Sudhan Putcha; Sirisha Kondreddi; N Suman Kumar; Durga Prasad Tadi
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug

5.  Effect of technique and impression material on the vertical misfit of a screw-retained, three-unit implant bridge: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Hamidreza Rajati Haghi; Masoud Shiehzadeh; Mohammadreza Nakhaei; Fatemeh Ahrary; Saeid Sabzevari
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.