Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: A review of properties and techniques

Chee, Winston W.L.; Donovan, Terry

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(92)90192-d

Cited by 167 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, recently, addition silicones have been labeled as hydrophilic due to extrinsic surfactant addition, improving oral tissue and gypsum wettability when the impression and cast pouring are performed. 6,19 Even though a superficial characteristics evaluation was not the aim of the present study, bubbles or voids were not observed on the stone cast surfaces obtained with addition silicone. In relation to accuracy, condensation silicones presented greater discrepancies than did addition silicones.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several impression materials are available in the Brazilian marketplace to be used in oral rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of different impression materials used for fixed partial dentures following the manufacturers' instructions. A master model representing a partially edentulous mandibular right hemi-arch segment whose teeth were prepared to receive full crowns was used. Custom trays were prepared with auto-polymerizing acrylic resin and impressions were performed with a dental surveyor, standardizing the path of insertion and removal of the tray. Alginate and elastomeric materials were used and stone casts were obtained after the impressions. For the silicones, impression techniques were also compared. To determine the impression materials' accuracy, digital photographs of the master model and of the stone casts were taken and the discrepancies between them were measured. The data were subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's complementary test. Polyether and addition silicone following the single-phase technique were statistically different from alginate, condensation silicone and addition silicone following the double-mix technique (p ≤ .05), presenting smaller discrepancies. However, condensation silicone was similar (p ≥ .05) to alginate and addition silicone following the double-mix technique, but different from polysulfide. The results led to the conclusion that different impression materials and techniques influenced the stone casts' accuracy in a way that polyether, polysulfide and addition silicone following the single-phase technique were more accurate than the other materials.Descriptors: Dental impression materials; Dental impression technique; Fixed partial denture.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 It was reassuring that the majority of the practitioners in this study routinely used an addition cured silicone impression material yet somewhat surprising that relatively few practitioners used polyether materials routinely. Polyether impression materials are very rigid and usually recommended for implant cases.…”

Section: Choice Of Indirect Restoration For Anterior Teethmentioning

confidence: 82%

Contemporary dental practice in the UK: indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To investigate, by questionnaire, the use and selection of materials and techniques for indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics by dental practitioners in the North West of England and Scotland. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 1,000 general dental practitioners selected at random from dentists in Scotland and the North West of England. Non-responders were sent another questionnaire after a period of 4 weeks had elapsed. Results: A total of 701 usable questionnaires were returned, giving a response rate of 70%. When selecting a material for the core build-up of vital teeth, practitioners used the following materials (%): amalgam (60), dual and light-cured resin composite (54), glass-ionomer cements (47), compomer (29) and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (24). Where the use of a post was indicated indirect posts of both precious (67) and non-precious (37) alloys were preferred to prefabricated posts by the majority of practitioners for the restoration of root filled teeth. Direct titanium (14) and stainless steel (14) posts were not used extensively. Impression materials used by the practitioners were as follows: addition-cured silicone (70), condensation-cured silicone (20), polyether (9) and polysulphide (2). Traditional glass-ionomer cements (59) were used for the luting of single and multiple porcelain fused to metal units, with zinc phosphate and polycarboxylate cements (33) being the preferred alternatives. Conclusions: The majority of the practitioners surveyed in this study used: amalgam for core build-ups; indirect posts; addition-cured silicone for impressions; and glass-ionomer cements for luting procedures.

show abstract

“…The dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials is influenced by shrinkage caused by polymerization, the byproducts of chemical reactions, thermal changes and incomplete elastic recovery from deformation 6,7,9) , while factors such as impression disinfection 24,25) , pouring time 26,27) and the impression technique 6,11,12,15) affect the accuracy. The present work is one of the few studies to directly assess the accuracy and dimensional stability of a thin impression margin (1×0.2 mm) over time using a reproduction of the finish line and emergence profile on the impression material itself.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies examining the effect of a wash bulk of PVS on the accuracy of the stone dies and/or the restoration have led to contradictory conclusions. A wash thickness of 2 mm was the most accurate for the fabrication of stone dies in some studies [14][15][16] , while in others, a thickness of 2-4 mm 17,18) or more 19) was needed for the most accurate impressions. The accuracy of a thin wash bulk of 0.5-1.0 mm has not been reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane impression material reproducing the sulcular area

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dimensional stability of a thin intra sulcular impression material reproducing the preparation finish line was evaluated. Impressions were taken of a stainless-steel master model of a simulated abutment with a 'gingival sulcus' using Express regular, Express fast and Aquasil. The putty-wash two-step technique was applied with spacer thicknesses of 0.5, 1 and 1.5 mm. Mid mesiodistal and bucco-lingual measurements were taken directly from the sulcular impression material after 0.5, 2, 24, 48 and 72 h via a Toolmaker's microscope. The discrepancies between the measurements of the impression material and the master model were calculated. The discrepancies changed significantly over time (p<0.001). The use of a 0.5 mm spacer resulted in a negative deviation from the model (2-46 µm), minimally after 2 h. The use of 1 and 1.5 mm spacers showed a positive deviation from the model (21-52 µm) and both are equally recommended. Investment can be postponed until 72 h.

show abstract

Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: A review of properties and techniques

Cited by 167 publications

References 8 publications

Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials

Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials

Contemporary dental practice in the UK: indirect restorations and fixed prosthodontics

Dimensional stability of polyvinyl siloxane impression material reproducing the sulcular area

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About