Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.06419
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Effect of techniques, trays and materials on accuracy of impressions clinically made

Efeito de técnicas, moldeiras e materiais na exatidão de moldagens odontológicas.

Aion Mangino MESSIAS; Stephania Caroline Rodolfo SILVA; Filipe de Oliveira ABI-RACHED; Raphael Freitas SOUZA; José Maurício dos Santos Nunes REIS

Downloads: 0
Views: 27

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Making accurate and dimensionally stable impressions to duplicate oral conditions and tooth morphology is an essential step of prosthetic dentistry for fabricating well-fitted indirect restorations and, consequently, ensure the longevity and success of the treatment. Several authors describe pros and cons of different impression techniques, although there is no unanimity among them about the best one.

Objective: This study evaluated casts’ accuracy made by different impression techniques, trays and materials.

Material and method: 10 patients were selected and 20 impressions from teeth #13 to #16 were performed using single-step (SS) and two-step techniques, made with metal stock and customized acrylic resin partial trays, vinyl polysiloxane and condensation silicone rubbers. Type IV gypsum was used to pour the casts. Three photographs of each patient (baseline), as their respective gypsum casts, were taken, measured in their interested buccal surface area. Comparisons of area values among experimental groups and baseline were performed. Data showed adherence to normal curve, being submitted to 3-way ANOVA/Bonferroni test (α=.05).

Result: Technique produced significant differences (P=0.02). SS technique was more accurate than BUR one (P=0.003; 95=1.22 to 5.98), but both resulted in similar casts to PVC, MOV and NR techniques, which were similar to each other (P>0.05).

Conclusion: SS technique showed the closest absolute values to baseline.

Keywords

Dental impression materials, silicone elastomers, dental impression technique, measurements, methods and theories

Resumo

Resumo: Introdução: Realizar moldagens precisas e dimensionalmente estáveis que dupliquem a condição oral é um passo essencial para a confecção de restaurações indiretas de qualidade, garantindo seu sucesso e longevidade. Diversos estudos tem demonstrado os prós e contras de diferentes técnicas de moldagem, mas nenhum consenso da melhor técnica ainda foi descrito.

Objetivo: Este estudo avaliou a exatidão de modelos de gesso confeccionados por diferentes técnicas de moldagem, moldeiras e materiais.

Material e método: 10 pacientes foram selecionados e 20 moldes dos dentes #13 até #16 foram realizados utilizando técnicas simultânea (SS) e de dois passos, realizados com moldeiras parciais metálicas e individuais de resina acrílica, silicones de adição e condensação. Gesso tipo IV foi usados para os vazamentos. Três fotografias de cada paciente (baseline), assim como dos seus respectivos modelos de gesso foram realizadas e sua área foi então mensurada, na porção vestibular. Comparações de valores de área entre os grupos experimentais e o baseline foram performadas. Os dados mostraram aderência a curva normal, sendo submetidos ao teste 3-way ANOVA/Bonferroni (α=.05).

Resultado: As técnicas produziram diferenças significativas (P=0.02).Técnica simultânea foi mais precisa que a BUR (P=0.0003; 95=1,22 a 5.98), mas ambas resultaram em modelos similares àqueles feitos por meio das técnicas de PVC, MOV e sem NR, que foram similares entre si (P>0.05).

Conclusão: Técnica simultânea demonstrou valores absolutos similares àqueles demonstrados pelo baseline.
 

Palavras-chave

Materiais para moldagem odontológica, elastômeros de silicone, técnica de moldagem odontológica, medidas, métodos e teorias

References

Cho SH, Schaefer O, Thompson GA, Guentsch A. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Apr;113(4):310-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.09.027. PMid:25682531.

Chen SY, Liang WM, Chen FN. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric impression materials. J Dent. 2004 Nov;32(8):603-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2004.04.002. PMid:15476954.

Kang AH, Johnson GH, Lepe X, Wataha JC. Accuracy of a reformulated fast-set vinyl polysiloxane impression material using dual-arch trays. J Prosthet Dent. 2009 May;101(5):332-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60066-4. PMid:19410067.

Endo T, Finger WJ. Dimensional accuracy of a new polyether impression material. Quintessence Int. 2006 Jan;37(1):47-51. PMid:16429703.

Balkenhol M, Haunschild S, Erbe C, Wöstmann B. Influence of prolonged setting time on permanent deformation of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 May;103(5):288-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60060-1. PMid:20416412.

Lu H, Nguyen B, Powers JM. Mechanical properties of 3 hydrophilic addition silicone and polyether elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Aug;92(2):151-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.05.016. PMid:15295324.

Mandikos MN. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical use. Aust Dent J. 1998 Dec;43(6):428-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.1998.tb00204.x. PMid:9973714.

Craig RG. Review of dental impression materials. Adv Dent Res. 1988 Aug;2(1):51-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08959374880020012001. PMid:3073785.

Faria AC, Rodrigues RC, Macedo AP, Mattos MG, Ribeiro RF. Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials. Braz Oral Res. 2008 Oct-Dec;22(4):293-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242008000400002. PMid:19148382.

Herfort TW, Gerberich WW, Macosko CW, Goodkind RJ. Viscosity of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent. 1977 Oct;38(4):396-404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(77)90093-2. PMid:269278.

Fano V, Gennari PU, Ortalli I. Dimensional stability of silicone-based impression materials. Dent Mater. 1992 Mar;8(2):105-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(92)90064-J. PMid:1521690.

Burns J, Palmer R, Howe L, Wilson R. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: An in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays. J Prosthet Dent. 2003 Mar;89(3):250-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2003.38. PMid:12644799.

Brosky ME, Major RJ, DeLong R, Hodges JS. Evaluation of dental arch reproduction using three-dimensional optical digitization. J Prosthet Dent. 2003 Nov;90(5):434-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.08.021. PMid:14586306.

Patil PS, Chowdhary R, Mishra S. Comparison of custom trays and stock trays using polyvinylsiloxane to evaluate linear dimensional accuracy: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2008;8(3):156-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.49021.

Hung SH, Purk JH, Tira DE, Eick JD. Accuracy of one-step versus two-steps putty wash addition silicone technique. J Prosthet Dent. 1992 May;67(5):583-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90151-Y. PMid:1527737.

Morgano SM, Milot P, Ducharme P, Rose L. Ability of various impression materials to produce duplicate dies from successive impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 1995 Apr;73(4):333-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80327-0. PMid:7783010.

Nissan J, Laufer BZ, Brosh T, Assif D. Accuracy of three polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Feb;83(2):161-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(00)80007-4. PMid:10668027.

Stober T, Johnson GH, Schmitter M. Accuracy of the newly formulated vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression material. J Prosthet Dent. 2010 Apr;103(4):228-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(10)60035-2. PMid:20362766.

Kahn RL, Donovan TE, Chee WW. Interaction of gloves and rubber dam with poly (vinyl siloxane) impression material: a screening test. Int J Prosthodont. 1989 Jul-Aug;2(4):342-6. PMid:2638846.

Silva SC, Messias AM, Abi-Rached FO, Souza RF, Reis JM. Accuracy of gypsum casts after different impression techniques and double pouring. PLoS One. 2016 Oct 13;11(10):1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164825.

Brosky ME, Pesun IJ, Lowder PD, Delong R, Hodges JS. Laser digitization of casts to determine the effect of tray selection and cast formation technique on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Feb;87(2):204-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2002.121240. PMid:11854678.

Garrofé AB, Ferrari BA, Picca M, Kaplan AE. Linear dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials over time. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2011;24(3):289-94. PMid:22550824.

Basapogu S, Pilla A, Pathipaka S. Dimensional accuracy of hydrophilic and hydrophobic VPS impression materials using different impression techniques - an invitro study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Feb;10(2):ZC56-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/17323.7259. PMid:27042587.

Rajapur A, Dixit S, Hoshing C, Raikar SP. The influence of tray space and repeat pours on the accuracy of monophasic polyvinylsiloxane impression. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012 Nov;13(6):824-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1236. PMid:23404010.

Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco MT 2nd, Hovijitra S, Brown DT, Andres CJ. Dimensional Accuracy of Dental Casts: Influence of Tray Material, Impression Material, and Time. J Prosthodont. 2002 Jun;11(2):98-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/jopr.2002.125192. PMid:12087547.
 

5d7fc98e0e8825b25bbbebff rou Articles
Links & Downloads

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections