Accuracy of a separating foil impression using a novel polyolefin foil compared to a custom tray and a stock tray technique
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. To compare the dimensional accuracy of three impression techniques- a separating foil impression, a custom tray impression, and a stock tray impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A machined mandibular complete-arch metal model with special modifications served as a master cast. Three different impression techniques (n = 6 in each group) were performed with addition-cured silicon materials: i) putty-wash technique with a prefabricated metal tray (MET) using putty and regular body, ii) single-phase impression with custom tray (CUS) using regular body material, and iii) two-stage technique with stock metal tray (SEP) using putty with a separating foil and regular body material. All impressions were poured with epoxy resin. Six different distances (four intra-abutment and two inter-abutment distances) were gauged on the metal master model and on the casts with a microscope in combination with calibrated measuring software. The differences of the evaluated distances between the reference and the three test groups were calculated and expressed as mean (± SD). Additionally, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated and significant differences between the experimental groups were assumed when confidence intervals did not overlap. RESULTS. Dimensional changes compared to reference values varied between -74.01 and 32.57 탆 (MET), -78.86 and 30.84 (CUS), and between -92.20 and 30.98 (SEP). For the intra-abutment distances, no significant differences among the experimental groups were detected. CUS showed a significantly higher dimensional accuracy for the inter-abutment distances with -0.02 and –0.08 percentage deviation compared to MET and SEP. CONCLUSION. The separation foil technique is a simple alternative to the custom tray technique for single tooth restorations, while limitations may exist for extended restorations with multiple abutment teeth.
Abstract
PURPOSE. To compare the dimensional accuracy of three impression techniques- a separating foil impression, a custom tray impression, and a stock tray impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A machined mandibular complete-arch metal model with special modifications served as a master cast. Three different impression techniques (n = 6 in each group) were performed with addition-cured silicon materials: i) putty-wash technique with a prefabricated metal tray (MET) using putty and regular body, ii) single-phase impression with custom tray (CUS) using regular body material, and iii) two-stage technique with stock metal tray (SEP) using putty with a separating foil and regular body material. All impressions were poured with epoxy resin. Six different distances (four intra-abutment and two inter-abutment distances) were gauged on the metal master model and on the casts with a microscope in combination with calibrated measuring software. The differences of the evaluated distances between the reference and the three test groups were calculated and expressed as mean (± SD). Additionally, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated and significant differences between the experimental groups were assumed when confidence intervals did not overlap. RESULTS. Dimensional changes compared to reference values varied between -74.01 and 32.57 탆 (MET), -78.86 and 30.84 (CUS), and between -92.20 and 30.98 (SEP). For the intra-abutment distances, no significant differences among the experimental groups were detected. CUS showed a significantly higher dimensional accuracy for the inter-abutment distances with -0.02 and –0.08 percentage deviation compared to MET and SEP. CONCLUSION. The separation foil technique is a simple alternative to the custom tray technique for single tooth restorations, while limitations may exist for extended restorations with multiple abutment teeth.
참고문헌 (34)
- Zimmermann M, "Intraoral scanning systems - a current overview", Int J Comput Dent, 18, pp.101~129 (2015)
- Yuzbasioglu E, "Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes", BMC Oral Health, 14, pp.10~ (2014)
- Joda T, "Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator’s preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions:a randomized controlled trial", Clin Oral Implants Res (2016)
- Chochlidakis KM, "Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis", J Prosthet Dent, 116, pp.184~190 (2016)
- Ender A, "In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions", J Prosthet Dent, 115, pp.313~320 (2016)
- Güth JF, "Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization", Clin Oral Investig (2016)
- Boeddinghaus M, "Accuracy of single-tooth restorations based on intraoral digital and conventional impressions in patients", Clin Oral Investig, 19, pp.2027~2034 (2015)
- Hamalian TA, "Impression materials in fixed prosthodontics: influence of choice on clinical procedure", J Prosthodont, 20, pp.153~160 (2011)
- Wadhwani CP, "Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials", J Prosthet Dent, 93, pp.530~539 (2005)
- Eames WB, "Elastomeric impression materials: effect of bulk on accuracy", J Prosthet Dent, 41, pp.304~307 (1979)
- Mansfield MA, "Elastomeric impression materials. A method of measuring dimensional stability", Br Dent J, 139, pp.267~272 (1975)
- Schnell R, "Dimensional stability of rubber base impressions and certain other factors affecting accuracy", J Am Dent Assoc, 57, pp.39~48 (1958)
- Boulton JL, "A laboratory study of dimensional changes for three elastomeric impression materials using custom and stock trays", Aust Dent J, 41, pp.398~404 (1996)
- Van Noort R, "Introduction to dental materials", pp.186~208 (2007), Mosny Elsevier
- Shillingburg HT Jr, "Impression materials and techniques used for cast restorations in eight states", J Am Dent Assoc, 100, pp.696~699 (1980)
- Clark DM, "The use of specific dental schooltaught restorative techniques by practicing clinicians", J Dent Educ, 65, pp.760~765 (2001)
- Chee WW, "Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials:a review of properties and techniques", J Prosthet Dent, 68, pp.728~732 (1992)
- Chugh A, "Accuracy of different puttywash impression techniques with various spacer thickness", Int J Clin Pediatr Dent, 5, pp.33~38 (2012)
- Nissan J, "Accuracy of three polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques", J Prosthet Dent, 83, pp.161~165 (2000)
- Shiozawa M, "Effects of the space for wash materials on sulcus depth reproduction with addition-curing silicone using two-step putty-wash technique", Dent Mater J, 32, pp.150~155 (2013)
- Manoj SS, "A comparative evaluation of the linear dimensional accuracy of four impression techniques using polyether impression material", J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 13, pp.428~438 (2013)
- Terry DA, "The custom impression tray: fabrication and utilization", Dent Today, 29, pp.132~ (2010)
- Singh K, "Effect of different impression techniques on the dimensional accuracy of impressions using various elastomeric impression materials:an in vitro study", J Contemp Dent Pract, 13, pp.98~106 (2012)
- Saunders WP, "Effect of impression tray design and impression technique upon the accuracy of stone casts produced from a putty-wash polyvinyl siloxane impression material", J Dent, 19, pp.283~289 (1991)
- Nissan J, "Effect of various putty-wash impression techniques on marginal fit of cast crowns", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 33, pp.e37~e42 (2013)
- Dugal R, "Comparative evaluation of dimensional accuracy of different polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impression techniques-in vitro study", J Int Oral Health, 5, pp.85~94 (2013)
- Kumar V, "Evaluation of effect of tray space on the accuracy of condensation silicone, addition silicone and polyether impression materials: an in vitro study", J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 12, pp.154~160 (2012)
- Nissan J, "Effect of wash bulk on the accuracy of polyvinyl siloxane putty-wash impressions", J Oral Rehabil, 29, pp.357~361 (2002)
- Rathee S, "A comparison of dimensional accuracy of addition silicone of different consistencies with two different spacer designs - In-vitro study", J Clin Diagn Res, 8, pp.ZC38~ZC41 (2014)
- Stober T, "Accuracy of the newly formulated vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression material", J Prosthet Dent, 103, pp.228~239 (2010)
- Donovan TE, "A review of contemporary impression materials and techniques", Dent Clin North Am, 48, pp.445~470 (2004)
- Luthardt RG, "Clinical parameters influencing the accuracy of 1- and 2-stage impressions: a randomized controlled trial", Int J Prosthodont, 21, pp.322~327 (2008)
- Bomberg TJ, "Impression material thickness in stock and custom trays", J Prosthet Dent, 54, pp.170~172 (1985)
- Syrek A, "Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling", J Dent, 38, pp.553~559 (2010)