SUMMARY
Objectives: To evaluate the three-dimensional (3D) changes of three elastomeric impression materials using a novel measurement method for the first 24 hours after preparation.
Methods and Materials: Three impression materials consisting of a low-viscosity polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) (Aquasil LV, Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA) and two vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) materials consisting of a light body (EXA’lence LB, GC America, Alsip, IL, USA) and monophase (EXA’lence Monophase, GC America) materials were used in this study. All materials were prepared following manufacturer’s recommendations with approximately 1–2 millimeters of material placed on the measurement pedestal of a calibrated noncontact, video imaging based, volumetric change measuring device (AcuVol ver 2.5.9, Bisco, Schaumburg, IL, USA). Data collection was initiated immediately, with measurements made every 30 seconds for 24 hours. Each material was evaluated 10 times (n=10). Evaluated parameters included were 24-hour mean shrinkage, mean shrinkage at time of recommended first pour, mean shrinkage between recommended first pour and 24 hours, mean maximum shrinkage, and the time of maximum shrinkage. Mean data, both within and between each group, was evaluated using Kruskal–Wallis/Dunn’s tests at a 95% level of confidence (α=0.05).
Results: All three materials were found to have significant differences (p<0.001) in volumetric shrinkage over 24 hours. Aquasil LV and EXA’lence LB polymerization shrinkage rates were statistically similar all through the 24-hour evaluation (p=0.92). All three materials demonstrated similar (p=0.19) shrinkage between 10 and 15 minutes after preparation, while between 5 and 16 hours both EXA’lence Monophase and low-viscosity materials demonstrated similar polymerization shrinkage values (p=0.22). EXA’lence Monophase demonstrated significantly greater 24-hour mean shrinkage (p<0.008) as well as shrinkage between recommended first pour time and 24 hours (p=0.003) than Aquasil LV and EXA’lence LB. EXA’lence Monophase demonstrated significantly greater (p=0.002) shrinkage at the recommended time of first pour as compared to Aquasil LV and EXA’lence LB that displayed similar shrinkage (p=0.89). Furthermore, all materials demonstrated increasing polymerization shrinkage values that reached a maximum between 16 for Aquasil LV and 20 hours for EXA’lence LB, after which some relaxation behavior was observed. However, EXA’lence Monophase did not display any relaxation behavior over the 24-hour evaluation.
Conclusions: Under the conditions of this study, volumetric polymerization shrinkage was observed for one polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) and two vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) materials for up to 24 hours. All impression materials exhibited fast early volumetric shrinkage that continued past the manufacturer’s recommended removal time. Dimensional change behavior was not uniform within or between groups; resultant volume change between the manufacturer recommended pouring time and 24 hours might represent up to from 20% to 30% of the total material shrinkage. It may be prudent to pour elastomeric impressions at the earliest time possible following the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Effect of the Threshold Kinetics on the Filament Relaxation Behavior of Ag‐Based Diffusive Memristors
