The Effect of Pouring Time on Dimensional Accuracy of Polyvinyl Siloxane Impression Materials

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate of the dimensional accuracy of Polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impression materials (Spirias, Imicryl, Konya, Turkey and Variotime, Heraeus, Hanau, Germany) by using stone models after different pouring time (1 hour and 24 hours). Methods: A standard maxillary dentulous acrylic model was selected as master model. Two linear measurements were selected on each sample for the evaluation of the models (x: 13-23 distance, y: 13-26 distance). A total of 40 samples were divided into 4 groups according to the impression brands and pouring time (n=10). All of measurements were made with CEREC SW 4.2.3 software (Sirona Dental System, GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) using “distance” tools of the programme. Statistical analysis was performed by using the IBM SPSS Statistics, Version 25 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY). A value of p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The relationship between different pouring times (1 hour and 24 hours) was not statistically significant (p>0.05). When the paired relations with the master model are evaluated, t test and p values show that there is statistically significant difference (p<0.05). Conclusion: When compared with the main model, PVS materials for both brands show dimensional distortion. For PVS impression materials, the pouring of the impressions does not make any difference.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Impression materials
• polyvinylsiloxane
• dimensional accuracy

Model Elde Etme Süresinin Polivinil Siloksan Ölçü Malzemelerinin Boyutsal Doğruluğu Üzerine Etkisi

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, Polivinilsiloksan (PVS) ölçü malzemelerinin (Spirias, Imicryl, Konya, Türkiye ve Variotime, Heraeus, Hanau, Almanya) farklı döküm sürelerinden sonra (1 saat ve 24 saat) alçı modeller kullanılarak boyutsal doğruluğunun değerlendirilmesidir. Yöntem: Ana model olarak standart maksiller akrilik model seçildi. Modellerin değerlendirilmesi için her numune üzerinde x ve y mesafesi adıyla iki lineer ölçüm noktası belirlendi (x: 13-23 nolu dişler arası mesafe, y: 13-26 nolu dişler arası mesafe). Ölçü markalarına ve dökme süresine göre toplam 40 örnek 4 gruba ayrıldı (n=10). Tüm ölçümler “mesafe” araçları kullanılarak CEREC SW 4.2.3 (Sirona Dental System, GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) yazılımı ile yapıldı. İstatistiksel analiz, IBM SPSS Statistics, Sürüm 25 (Windows için IBM SPSS Statistics, IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY) kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. p<0,05 değeri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı kabul edilmiştir. Bulgular: Farklı dökme süreleri (1 saat ve 24 saat) arasındaki ilişki istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunamamıştır (p>0,05). Ana model ile eşleştirilmiş markaların ilişkileri değerlendiriliğinde, t testi ve p değerleri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark olduğu gösterilmiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: Ana modelle karşılaştırıldığında, her iki marka için PVS malzemeleri boyutsal değişim göstermektedir. Ancak bu değişim PVS ölçü malzemeleri için, alçı modellerin dökülme süreleri arasında herhangi bir fark yaratmamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ölçü malzemeleri
• polivinil siloksan
• boyutsal stabilite

Kaynakça

1. Dogan S, Schwedhelm ER, Heindl H, et al. Clinical efficacy of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials using the one-step two-viscosity impression technique. J Prosthet Dent 2015;114(2):217–22. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.03.019
2. Garg S, Kumar S, Jain S, et al. Comparison of dimensional accuracy of stone models fabricated by three different impression techniques using two brands of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019;20(8):928–34. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2629
3. Conrad HJ, Pesun IJ, DeLong R, et al. Accuracy of two impression techniques with angulated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97(6):349–56. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60023-7
4. Lee H, Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, et al. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(2):107–13. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60026-8.
5. Caputi S, Varvara G. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(4):274–81. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60061-X
6. Raigrodski AJ, Dogan S, Mancl LA, et al. A Clinical Comparison of Two Vinyl Polysiloxane Impression Materials Using the One-Step Technique. J Prosthet Dent 2009;102(3):179–86. doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60143-8.
7. Levartovsky S, Zalis M, Pilo R, et al. The effect of one-step vs. two-step impression techniques on long-term accuracy and dimensional stability when the finish line is within the gingival sulcular area. J Prosthodont. 2014;23(2):124–33. doi:10.1111/jopr.12062
8. Chee WWL, Donovan TE. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: A review of properties and techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68(5):728–32. doi:10.1016/0022-3913(92)90192-d

9. Clancy JMS, Scandrett FR, Ettinger RL. Long‐term dimensional stability of three current elastomers. J Oral Rehabil. 1983;10(4):325–33. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.1983.tb00127.x
10. Lacy AM, Fukui H, Bellman T, et al. Time-dependent accuracy of elastomer impression materials. Part II: Polyether, polysulfides, and polyvinylsiloxane. J Prosthet Dent. 1981;45(3):329–33. doi:10.1016/0022-3913(81)90400-5
11. Hung SH, Purk JH, Tira DE, et al. Accuracy of one-step versus two-step putty wash addition silicone impression technique. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;67(5):583–9. doi:10.1016/0022-3913(92)90151-y
12. Leão MP, Pinto CP, Sponchiado AP, et al. Dimensional stability of a novel polyvinyl siloxane impression technique. Brazilian J Oral Sci. 2014;13(2):118–23. doi:10.1590/1677-3225v13n2a08
13. Donovan TE, Chee WWL. A review of contemporary impression materials and techniques. Dent Clin North Am. 2004;48(2):445–70. doi:10.1016/j.cden.2003.12.014
14. Ozsoy HE, Najafova, L, Kurtulmus H. Quality of impressions using two different brands of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. Sanamed. 2020;15(2):111–114. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.24125/sanamed.v15i2.409
15. Shillingburg, H.T., Hobo, S., Whitsett, L.D., et al. (1997) Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics, 3rd Edition, Quintessence, Chicago, 185.
16. Pereira JR, Murata KY, do Valle AL, et al. Linear dimensional changes in plaster die models using different elastomeric materials. Braz Oral Res. 2010;24(3):336–41. doi:10.1590/s1806-83242010000300013
17. Franco EB, Da Cunha LF, Benetti AR. Effect of storage period on the accuracy of elastomeric impressions. J Appl Oral Sci. 2007;15(3):195–8. doi:10.1590/s1678-77572007000300008
18. Franco EB, da Cunha LF, Herrera FS, et al. Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique. ISRN Dent. 2011;2011:1–5. doi:10.5402/2011/341546