Literature DB >> 8933434

The effect of marginal thickness on the distortion of different impression materials.

B Z Laufer1, H Baharav, Y Ganor, H S Cardash.   

Abstract

An impression of the margins of a prepared tooth and adjacent gingival sulcus must be of sufficient thickness to withstand distortion and tearing when the impression is removed from the mouth. The purpose of this study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of Elite, Examix, and Express polyvinyl siloxanes; Permadyne polyether; and Permlastic polysulfide elastomeric impression materials. These materials were used to make impressions of a metal model that simulated prepared abutments with gingival sulci of various widths. A traveling microscope was used to measure the abutments and impression widths, and the number of defects in each impression was recorded. Between 70% and 100% of the abutment impressions with sulcular widths of 0.05 mm exhibited defects, which prevented accurate measurements in this group. Express material demonstrated a high number of defects in the 0.10 and 0.16 mm sulcular width groups. No great difference in average maximum distortion values or coefficients of variation (CV) were detected among the materials used to make impressions of abutments with sulcular width groups of 0.2 to 0.4 mm. For the sulci of 0.16 mm and less, Examix and Permiastic materials exhibited distortion and a CV comparable to the impressions of the wider sulcular groups, whereas Elite and Permadyne showed greater distortions and CVs. The differences were not statistically significant (analysis of variance) because of the larger CV among the groups. The larger coefficient of variation in the 0.1 and 0.16 mm sulcular width groups demonstrated inconsistencies in obtaining good impressions of abutments with such narrow sulcular widths.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8933434     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(96)90002-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  12 in total

1.  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

2.  Effect of the impression margin thickness on the linear accuracy of impression and stone dies: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Y G Naveen; Raghunath Patil
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2012-08-03

3.  A Comparison of Accuracy of Matrix Impression System with Putty Reline Technique and Multiple Mix Technique: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  M Praveen Kumar; Suneel G Patil; Bhandari Dheeraj; Keshav Reddy; Dinker Goel; Gopi Krishna
Journal:  J Int Oral Health       Date:  2015-06

4.  Comparative evaluation of the amount of gingival displacement produced by three different gingival retraction systems: An in vivo study.

Authors:  Jignesh Chaudhari; Paranjay Prajapati; Jayanti Patel; Rajesh Sethuraman; Y G Naveen
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

Review 5.  Gingival Retraction Methods for Fabrication of Fixed Partial Denture: Literature Review.

Authors:  Safari S; Vossoghi Sheshkalani Ma; Vossoghi Sheshkalani Mi; Hoseini Ghavam F; Hamedi M
Journal:  J Dent Biomater       Date:  2016-06

6.  Comparative evaluation of three gingival displacement materials for efficacy in tissue management and dimensional accuracy.

Authors:  Vijeta Gajbhiye; Rajlakshmi Banerjee; Priti Jaiswal; Anuj Chandak; Usha Radke
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun

7.  Accuracy of different putty-wash impression techniques with various spacer thickness.

Authors:  Anshul Chugh; Aman Arora; Vijay Pratap Singh
Journal:  Int J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2012-02-24

8.  Comparative clinical efficacy evaluation of three gingival displacement systems.

Authors:  Kirti Jajoo Shrivastava; Anjali Bhoyar; Surendra Agarwal; Saurabh Shrivastava; Swapnil Parlani; Varsha Murthy
Journal:  J Nat Sci Biol Med       Date:  2015-08

9.  Effect of various chemical agents used in gingival retraction systems on smear layer: Scanning electron microscope study.

Authors:  Krishna Shivraj Lahoti
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar

10.  Gingival Displacement in the Vertical and Horizontal Dimension under the Condition of Mild Gingivitis-A Randomized Clinical Study.

Authors:  Katharina Kuhn; David Zügel; Victor-Sebastian A Korbay; Thomas Papas; Sigmar Schnutenhaus; Ralph G Luthardt; Jens Dreyhaupt; Heike Rudolph
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 4.241

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.