Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative surface detail reproduction for elastomeric impression materials: Study on reproducibility performance.
Varvara, G; Sinjari, B; Bernardi, S; Turkyilmaz, I; Malvezzi, V; Piattelli, M; Caputi, S.
Afiliação
  • Varvara G; Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Dental School, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
  • Sinjari B; Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Dental School, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
  • Bernardi S; Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
  • Turkyilmaz I; Department of Prosthodontics, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, NY, USA.
  • Malvezzi V; Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Dental School, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
  • Piattelli M; Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Dental School, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
  • Caputi S; Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, Dental School, 'G. D'Annunzio' University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents ; 35(1): 161-169, 2021.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33435664
ABSTRACT
For dental impression of a prepared tooth, the goal is a void-free negative representation from which an accurate cast of a tooth and its surrounding tissue can be reproduced. This in-vitro study assessed and compared the reproduction accuracies of surface detail obtained with three different dental elastomeric impression materials vinyl polysiloxane (VPS), vinyl polyether silicone (VPES), and polyether (PE). A stainless-steel model with two abutments was used, with impressions taken 10 times for each material, for 20 abutment impressions per group, using a two-phase, one-step technique (heavy body/light body). The impressions were removed and assessed for numbers of enclosed voids and open voids visible on the surface. The defect frequency was 95% for impressions with the VPS and VPES materials, and 30% for the PE material. No significant differences were seen for number of impressions with defects for VPS versus VPES. Significant differences were seen for VPS and VPES versus the PE material (P <.05). No significant differences were seen for the defect type distributions across these three impression materials. The PE impression material showed better accuracy for reproduction of surface detail of these dental impressions compared to the VPS and VPES impression materials.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnica de Moldagem Odontológica / Materiais para Moldagem Odontológica / Modelos Dentários Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnica de Moldagem Odontológica / Materiais para Moldagem Odontológica / Modelos Dentários Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article