Search

Purpose: Fast-setting impression materials may be prone to inaccuracies due to accidental divergence from the recommended mixing protocol. This prospective randomized clinical trial aimed to assess three-dimensional (3D) deviations in the reproduction of subgingival tooth surfaces and to determine the effect of either following or purposely diverging from the recommended mixing procedure for a fast-setting addition-curing silicone (AS) and fast-setting polyether (PE). Materials and Methods: After three impressions each were taken from 96 participants, saw-cut gypsum casts were fabricated with a standardized procedure and then optically digitized. Data were assessed with a computer-aided 3D analysis. Results: For AS impressions, multivariate analysis of variance revealed a significant influence of the individual tooth and the degree to which the recommended mixing protocol was violated. For PE impressions, the ambient air temperature and individual tooth showed significant effects, while divergence from the recommended mixing protocol was not of significance. Conclusions: The fast-setting PE material was not affected by changes in the recommended mixing protocol. For the two fast-setting materials examined, no divergences from the recommended mixing protocol of less than 2 minutes led to failures in the reproduction of the subgingival tooth surfaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In vitro studies showed superior impression correctness for one-stage impressions. However, clinical data, especially clinical trials, are lacking in this matter. The aim of the study was to investigate the three-dimensional correctness of impressions for final restorations applying three different impression techniques. Method and Materials: Three impressions each were made from 48 patients with different techniques using metal stock trays. In a randomized order, one-stage putty-wash, two-stage putty-wash, and monophase impressions (respectively, Dimension Penta H and Garant L, Dimension Penta H Quick and Garant L Quick, Impregum Penta; 3M ESPE) were made with either polyvinyl siloxane or polyether materials. The double-cord technique was applied at all abutment teeth. Factors potentially influencing the correctness of the impressions were recorded. The precision of the impressions was three-dimensionally analyzed using the resulting gypsum models. Discrepancies between the impressions were calculated using the one-stage putty-wash impression as reference. Results: Discrepancies between the one-stage puttywash impressions and the monophase impressions are significantly lower compared with two-stage putty-wash impressions. The depth of the most subgingival portion of the preparation margin significantly influences the discrepancies between the impression techniques. Conclusion: In light of the major influence of clinical parameters on impression correctness, one-stage procedures should be favored. These findings support the results of in vitro investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The accuracy of dental impression taking is one major factor influencing the fit of crowns and fixed partial dentures. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of three-dimensional (3-D) tooth surface and subgingival tooth surface reproduction using three different silicone materials and the two-stage putty-and-wash technique. Materials and Methods: From 24 probands, three impressions each were taken with Express STD Putty/Wash (3M ESPE), Optosil/Xantopren L (Heraeus Kulzer), and an experimental ultralight body/putty material (3M ESPE) in a randomized order. The preliminary impression was cut according to established procedures for the twostage putty-and-wash technique. Master casts were manufactured with a standardized procedure and optically digitized. The 3-D accuracy was analyzed with a computer-aided procedure. The Express STD putty-and-wash impressions were used as a reference. Linear models were used for the statistical analysis. Results: Mean deviations of 27.0 μm and -23.6 μm were found for Optosil/Xantopren L and 26.5 μm and -22.6 μm for the experimental material when analyzing 3-D surface reproduction. The tooth surface (buccal/oral) significantly influenced the accuracy of the surface reproduction. Optosil/Xantopren L showed a more complete reproduction of the subgingival tooth surface than either the experimental or reference materials. Conclusion: The accuracy of the 3-D tooth surface reproduction as well as the reproduction of the subgingival tooth surface was not favorably influenced when the ultralight wash material was used with established cutting procedures for the preliminary impression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to evaluate the correspondence of intraoral digitization (ID) with extraoral digitization (ED) after impression taking. One-stage putty-and-wash impressions and ID were carried out in a randomized order for 10 subjects. The impressions were used to make casts, which were then subjected to ED. ID datasets were aligned to create computer-aided design reference models. Deviations between ID and ED were calculated. The mean positive and negative deviations were 37.7 and -48.4 µm, respectively, for one quadrant. The results showed that the ID system is well suited for the acquisition of single-tooth restorations and is of limited suitability for the acquisition of small multiple-unit restorations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the lingual surface morphology of central and lateral upper incisors evaluating constant morphological regions for better adhesion of industrial prefabricated lingual brackets., Material and Methods: A total of 102 randomly selected patients at the end of the first phase of second dentition with intact central and lateral upper incisors participated in this study. After impression taking and cast model preparation, 3D laser scans of the lingual surface of the upper central and lateral incisors were taken (Laserscan 3D®, Willytec, Munich, Germany), digitalised, and transferred into CAD software to analyse the surface morphology by superimposition. For better comparison of morphological variations and determination of the most constant lingual regions, the surface was divided into five parts: incisal edge, mesial ridge, lateral ridge, cingulum, and medial sector. Statistical analysis was performed by the paired t-test., Results: Statistically significant differences were found in all surfaces, with cingulum as the most inconstant region. The most constant region was the medial sector and the mesial ridge., Conclusion: As expected, the lingual surface underlies a high intra-individual variation complicating industrial prefabricated lingual brackets adhesion. However, the mesial ridge and the medial sector seem to be the most constant regions within intra-individual morphological variations.