Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of three different impression materials with evaluating the marginal fits of metal frameworks using replica technique.
Materials and Methods: A phantom premolar tooth was prepared with a 1 mm circumferential chamfer preparation. Four impression materials: two vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) (Affinis Precious, (Group A); Elite HD, (Group E)), one polyether (Impregum Penta Soft, (Group P)) and one vinyl siloxanether (Identium, (Group I)) were used for producing stone casts of this master model. Twelve measurements per replica were carried out using a light microscope X40 magnification by Leica software, to assess the vertical marginal gap (VMG). Data were analyzed using the analysis of variance followed by Tukey’s test (p=0.05).
Results: Specimens of the Group A and I showed significantly lower VMG values than those of Group E and Group P (p<0.001). Differences were not significant between groups A and I, and E and P either (p>0.05).
Conclusions: All impression materials were clinically acceptable. As well as composition of the impression materials, size of filler particles and fluid mechanics of flow into very small spaces can be effective on accuracy of the materials.
References
- Stober T, Johnson GH, Schmitter M (2010) Accuracy of the newly formulated vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression material. J Prosthet Dent 103, 228-239.
- Reich S, Uhlen S, Gozdowski S, Lohbauer U (2011) Measurement of cement thickness under lithium disilicate crowns using an impression material technique. Clin Oral Investig 15, 521-526.
- Schaefer O, Schmidt M, Goebel R, Kuepper H (2012) Qualitative and quantitative three dimensional accuracy of a single tooth captured by elastomeric impression materials: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 108, 165-172.
- Nissan J, Rosner O, Bukhari MA, Ghelfan O, Pilo R (2013) Effect of various putty-wash impression tecniques on marginal fit of cast crowns. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 33, e37-42.
- Shah S, Sundaram G, Bartlett D, Sherriff M (2004) The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimpositional software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques. J Dent 32, 653-658.
- Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM (2000) Interface dimensions of CEREC-2 MOD inlays. Dent Mater 16, 68-74.
- Oyague RC, Sanchez-Turrion A, Lopez-Lozano JF, Suarez-Garcia MJ (2012) Vertical discrepancy and microleakage of laser-sintered and vacuum-cast implant-supported structures luted with different cement types. J Dent 40, 123-130.
- McLean JW, von Fraunhoffer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 131, 107-111.
- Tsitrou EA, Northeast SE, van Noort R (2007) Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD/CAM. J Dent 35, 68-73.
- Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R (1985) The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1, 197-199.
- Colpani JT, Borba M, Della Bona A (2013) Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic crown copings. Dent Mater 29, 174-180.
- Karakaya S, Sengun A, Ozer F (2005) Evaluation of internal adaptation in ceramic and composite resin inlays by silicon replica technique. J Oral Rehabil 32, 448-453.
- Raigrodski AJ, Dogan S, Mancl LA, Heindl H (2009) A clinical comparison of two vinyl polysiloxane impression materials using the one-step technique. J Prosthet Dent 102, 179-186.
- Millar BJ, Dunne SM, Robinson PB (1998) In vitro study of the number of surface defects in monophase and two-phase addition silicone impressions. J Prosthet Dent 80, 32-35.
- Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco MT 2nd, Hovijitra S, Brown DT, Andres CJ (2002) Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J Prosthodont 11, 98-108.
- Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M (2008) Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 24, 1311-1315.
- Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns--validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 35, 116-122.
- Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD (1989) Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 62, 405-408.
- Enkling N, Bayer S, Jöhren P, Mericske-Stern R (2012) Vinylsiloxanether: a new impression material. Clinical study of implant impressions with vinylsiloxanether versus polyether materials. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14, 144-151.
- Ender A, Mehl A (2015) In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int 46, 9-17.
- Schoen FJ, Mohammed H, Fischlschweigner W, Going RE (1978) Objective evaluation of surface microreplication by dental impression materials. J Dent Res 57, 283-290.
- Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B (2015) Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 19, 2027-2034.
- Kuhn K, Ostertag S, Ostertag M, Walter MH, Luthardt RG, Rudolph H (2015) Comparison of an analog and digital quantitative and qualitative analysis for the fit of dental copings. Comput Biol Med 57, 32-41.
- Huang Z, Zhang L, Zhu J, Zhao Y, Zhang X (2015) Clinical marginal and internal fit of crowns fabricated using different CAD/CAM technologies. J Prosthodont 24, 291-295.
- Caputi S, Varvara G (2008) Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 99, 274-281.
- Idrıs B, Houston F, Claffey N (1995) Comparison of the dimensional accuracy of one- and two-step techniques with the use of putty-wash addition silicone impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 74, 535-541.
- Lee IK, DeLong R, Pintado MR, Malik R (1995) Evalution of factors affecting the accuracy of impressions using quantitative surface analysis. Oper Dent 20, 246-252.
Abstract
References
- Stober T, Johnson GH, Schmitter M (2010) Accuracy of the newly formulated vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression material. J Prosthet Dent 103, 228-239.
- Reich S, Uhlen S, Gozdowski S, Lohbauer U (2011) Measurement of cement thickness under lithium disilicate crowns using an impression material technique. Clin Oral Investig 15, 521-526.
- Schaefer O, Schmidt M, Goebel R, Kuepper H (2012) Qualitative and quantitative three dimensional accuracy of a single tooth captured by elastomeric impression materials: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 108, 165-172.
- Nissan J, Rosner O, Bukhari MA, Ghelfan O, Pilo R (2013) Effect of various putty-wash impression tecniques on marginal fit of cast crowns. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 33, e37-42.
- Shah S, Sundaram G, Bartlett D, Sherriff M (2004) The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimpositional software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques. J Dent 32, 653-658.
- Martin N, Jedynakiewicz NM (2000) Interface dimensions of CEREC-2 MOD inlays. Dent Mater 16, 68-74.
- Oyague RC, Sanchez-Turrion A, Lopez-Lozano JF, Suarez-Garcia MJ (2012) Vertical discrepancy and microleakage of laser-sintered and vacuum-cast implant-supported structures luted with different cement types. J Dent 40, 123-130.
- McLean JW, von Fraunhoffer JA (1971) The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 131, 107-111.
- Tsitrou EA, Northeast SE, van Noort R (2007) Evaluation of the marginal fit of three margin designs of resin composite crowns using CAD/CAM. J Dent 35, 68-73.
- Fransson B, Oilo G, Gjeitanger R (1985) The fit of metal-ceramic crowns, a clinical study. Dent Mater 1, 197-199.
- Colpani JT, Borba M, Della Bona A (2013) Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic crown copings. Dent Mater 29, 174-180.
- Karakaya S, Sengun A, Ozer F (2005) Evaluation of internal adaptation in ceramic and composite resin inlays by silicon replica technique. J Oral Rehabil 32, 448-453.
- Raigrodski AJ, Dogan S, Mancl LA, Heindl H (2009) A clinical comparison of two vinyl polysiloxane impression materials using the one-step technique. J Prosthet Dent 102, 179-186.
- Millar BJ, Dunne SM, Robinson PB (1998) In vitro study of the number of surface defects in monophase and two-phase addition silicone impressions. J Prosthet Dent 80, 32-35.
- Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco MT 2nd, Hovijitra S, Brown DT, Andres CJ (2002) Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J Prosthodont 11, 98-108.
- Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M (2008) Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 24, 1311-1315.
- Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G (2008) Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns--validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil 35, 116-122.
- Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD (1989) Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 62, 405-408.
- Enkling N, Bayer S, Jöhren P, Mericske-Stern R (2012) Vinylsiloxanether: a new impression material. Clinical study of implant impressions with vinylsiloxanether versus polyether materials. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14, 144-151.
- Ender A, Mehl A (2015) In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int 46, 9-17.
- Schoen FJ, Mohammed H, Fischlschweigner W, Going RE (1978) Objective evaluation of surface microreplication by dental impression materials. J Dent Res 57, 283-290.
- Boeddinghaus M, Breloer ES, Rehmann P, Wöstmann B (2015) Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients. Clin Oral Investig 19, 2027-2034.
- Kuhn K, Ostertag S, Ostertag M, Walter MH, Luthardt RG, Rudolph H (2015) Comparison of an analog and digital quantitative and qualitative analysis for the fit of dental copings. Comput Biol Med 57, 32-41.
- Huang Z, Zhang L, Zhu J, Zhao Y, Zhang X (2015) Clinical marginal and internal fit of crowns fabricated using different CAD/CAM technologies. J Prosthodont 24, 291-295.
- Caputi S, Varvara G (2008) Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 99, 274-281.
- Idrıs B, Houston F, Claffey N (1995) Comparison of the dimensional accuracy of one- and two-step techniques with the use of putty-wash addition silicone impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 74, 535-541.
- Lee IK, DeLong R, Pintado MR, Malik R (1995) Evalution of factors affecting the accuracy of impressions using quantitative surface analysis. Oper Dent 20, 246-252.
Details
| Journal Section | Original Research Articles |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | December 9, 2016 |
| Submission Date | February 13, 2016 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2016 |
Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.
CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.
Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.
Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.