Evaluation of Dimensional Accuracy of Three Combinations of Polyvinyl Siloxane Impression Material: An In Vitro Study

Background: Dual-arch impression technique allows the simultaneous recording of tooth preparation, opposing anatomic tooth and maxillomandibular relationship. The accuracy of reproduction of this easy and quick technique, however, has not been studied in detail in past. Objective: To compare the accuracy of the impressions made by using the same impression material in dual arch plastic trays, dual-arch metal trays and acrylic resin custom trays. Methods: The dies obtained from the addition silicone impressions made in dual-arch plastic trays, dual-arch metal trays and full arch acrylic resin custom trays were compared for the dimensional accuracy with the prepared typodont tooth as a control. Student’s paired t-test and unpaired t-test were used for the data analyses using the Statistical Package for Social Studies (SPSS) version 11.5. Results: The dies obtained from all the impression combinations showed increased dimension (acrylic resin custom trays 9.4 mm±0.048, dual-arch plastic trays 9.5 mm±0.035, dual-arch metal trays 9.41 mm±0.017) as compared to the dimension of control (9.39 mm±0.007). Conclusion: All the tray-impression material combinations showed variable accuracies. Full arch acrylic resin trays resulted in greatest accuracy whereas dual-arch plastic trays the least accuracy.Health Renaissance 2014;12(2): pp: 111-117

Download Full-text

Dimensional accuracy of extrusion- and photopolymerization-based 3D printers: In vitro study comparing printed casts

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry ◽

10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.11.011 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 125 (1) ◽

pp. 103-110 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Norbert Nestler ◽

Christian Wesemann ◽

Benedikt C. Spies ◽

Florian Beuer ◽

Axel Bumann

Keyword(s):

In Vitro Study ◽

Dimensional Accuracy ◽

Vitro Study ◽

3D Printers

Download Full-text

Evaluation and Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Newly Introduced Elastomeric Impression Material using 3D Laser Scanners: An in vitro Study

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice ◽

10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1311 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 14 (2) ◽

pp. 265-268 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Naveen S Yadav ◽

Teerthesh Jain ◽

Amrita Pandita ◽

SMA Feroz ◽

Pradeep LNU ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Three Dimensional ◽

Laser Scanner ◽

In Vitro Study ◽

Dimensional Accuracy ◽

Time Intervals ◽

Impression Material ◽

Impression Materials ◽

Laser Scanners ◽

Master Model

ABSTRACT Aim Aim of the present study was to comparatively evaluate dimensional accuracy of newely introduced elastomeric impression material after repeated pours at different time intervals. Materials and methods In the present study a total of 20 (10 + 10) impressions of master model were made from vinyl polyether silicone and vinyl polysiloxane impression material. Each impression was repeatedly poured at 1, 24 hours and 14 days. Therefore, a total of 60 casts were obtained. Casts obtained were scanned with three-dimensional (3D) laser scanner and measurements were done. Results Vinyl polyether silicone produced overall undersized dies, with greatest change being 0.14% only after 14 days. Vinyl polysiloxane produced smaller dies after 1 and 24 hours and larger dies after 14 days, differing from master model by only 0.07% for the smallest die and to 0.02% for the largest die. Conclusion All the deviations measured from the master model with both the impression materials were within a clinically acceptable range. Clinical significance In a typical fixed prosthodontic treatment accuracy of prosthesis is critical as it determines the success, failure and the prognosis of treatment including abutments. This is mainly dependent upon fit of prosthesis which in turn is dependent on dimensional accuracy of dies, poured from elastomeric impressions. How to cite this article Pandita A, Jain T, Yadav NS, Feroz SMA, Pradeep, Diwedi A. Evaluation and Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Newly Introduced Elastomeric Impression Material using 3D Laser Scanners: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(2):265-268.

Download Full-text