Comparing Volumetric Dimensional Stability and Accuracy of Newly Formulated Polyvinyl Siloxanether, Polyvinyl Siloxane and Polyether Impression Materials Using Micro-Computed Tomography

Aslan, Yılmaz Umut; Özkan, Yasemin

doi:10.33808/clinexphealthsci.474861

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(66 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the present study PVS impression material was used as golden standard to obtain STL files of conventional impressions (6,7). The deficiencies reported with elastomeric impression materials were technique sensitivity, patient discomfort, dimensional changes, dental stone and disinfection agent's distortion (19).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of the Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Two Different digital Impressions of Single Tooth Implant Treatments

Alibrahim

Aslan²

2020

Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Over the last decades, techniques and materials have evolved with the improvement in digital technology. Computer-aided impressions have been transforming the dental implant field with these developments. The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the accuracy and time efficiency between two intraoral scanning systems in single tooth implant treatment.Methods: 10 patients with single tooth bone level implant (Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) received one conventional impression with polyvinyl siloxane and three scans with 2 different intra-oral scanners (CEREC AC Omnicam and Straumann CARES IOS). The time required for the impressions was measured at this stage. The casts obtained from conventional impressions were scanned as the master model to evaluate accuracy. Digital impression files were analyzed using a software (Geomagic Control). Independent Samples Test was performed for trueness and precision. One-way ANOVA was executed for time efficiency. Least significant difference test for post hoc comparison was conducted (p<0.05). Results:The differences between the two systems regarding trueness and precision were not statistically significant (P>0.05), but a statistically significant difference was found in the time efficiency (P<0.05). CEREC AC showed the lowest mean values in time measures. Conclusions:There was no difference regarding accuracy in comparison between CEREC AC Omnicam and CARES. CEREC AC Omnicam was found to be superior in terms of time efficiency in comparison to CARES and conventional impressions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These materials show great dimensional accuracy and have been successfully used in prosthodontics for years (4,5). PVS is one of the commonly used impression materials in the field of dentistry; it is proved to guarantee accurate impression of the oral cavity (6)(7)(8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Two Different digital Impressions of Single Tooth Implant Treatments

Alibrahim

Aslan²

2020

Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Impressions are highly used in dentistry field, starting from making casts for diagnosis and making final casts to fabricate the definitive restorations. [1][2][3] In the conventional technique, a cast is made after an impression has been taken with a tray filled with impression material, and then poured into stone. There are some disadvantages with this technique such as time consuming to select a tray, distribution and setting of materials, disinfection, and sending of the impression to the technician.…”

Section: Yayına Kbulmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tüm dişleri mevcut hastalarda konvansiyonel ölçü ve intraoral dijital taramanın netliğinin karşılaştırılması

Alsayed¹,

Aslan²

2020

Selcuk Dental Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tüm dişleri mevcut hastalarda konvansiyonel ölçü ve intraoral dijital taramanın netliğinin karşılaştırılması Amaç: Son senelerde, direkt dijitalizasyon için farklı intraoral tarama sistemleri ortaya çıkmıştır. Ancak bu tarayıcılarının doğruluğu değişkendir ve hakkındaki bilgiler yetersizdir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, iki farklı intraoral tarama sisteminin, alt ve üst çene arasındaki tarama doğruluğu farkının karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç veYöntemler: 10 adet tam dişli hastanın her birinden bir adet PVS (Elite HD+, Zhermack SpA, İtalya) materyali ile ölçü alındı ve 3 adet alt-üst çene taraması CEREC OC(Sirona Dental Systems, Sirona, Bensheim, Almanya) ve Straumann CARES IOS (Intra oral Scanner, Basel, İsviçre) ile yapıldı. Konvansiyonel ölçüden elde edilen alçı modeller taratılarak referans model olarak netlik ve doğruluk kıyaslamasında kullanıldı. Netlik değerlendirilmesindeki deviasyonlar diğer ölçülerin birbiri üzerine çakıştırılması metodu ile gözlemlendi. Dijital ölçü dosyaları STL formatına dönüştürülerek (Geomagic Control; 3D Systems. ABD) işlendi ve analiz edildi. Bulgular: Doğruluk değerleri, CEREC OC için üst çenede 99.88±42.56 μm alt çenede, 82.6±26.81 μm dir. CARES IOS için üst çene doğruluk değeri 105.53±25.49 μm, alt çene doğruluk değeri 109.56±36.84 μm dur. İki sistem arasındaki doğruluk değeri farkı istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildir (P>0.05). Netliğin farkı istatiksel olarak anlamlıdır (P<0.05), CEREC OC alt ve üst çenede netlik açısından daha yüksek değerler gösterdi. Sonuç: CEREC OC netlik olarak CARES IOS sisteminden daha üstün bulunurken, doğruluk seviyesi her iki sistemde de benzerdir. Alt ve üst çeneler arasında her iki sistemde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmamıştır.

show abstract

Three-dimensional Change of Elastomeric Impression Materials During the First 24 Hours: A Pilot Study

Roberts

2021

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Comparing Volumetric Dimensional Stability and Accuracy of Newly Formulated Polyvinyl Siloxanether, Polyvinyl Siloxane and Polyether Impression Materials Using Micro-Computed Tomography

Cited by 4 publications

References 35 publications

Comparison of the Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Two Different digital Impressions of Single Tooth Implant Treatments

Comparison of the Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Two Different digital Impressions of Single Tooth Implant Treatments

Tüm dişleri mevcut hastalarda konvansiyonel ölçü ve intraoral dijital taramanın netliğinin karşılaştırılması

Three-dimensional Change of Elastomeric Impression Materials During the First 24 Hours: A Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About