Dimensional accuracy of novel vinyl polysiloxane compared with polyether impression materials

• Verfasst von: Waldecker, Moritz [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Rues, Stefan [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Rammelsberg, Peter [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Bömicke, Wolfgang [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Dimensional accuracy of novel vinyl polysiloxane compared with polyether impression materials
• Titelzusatz: an in vitro study
• Verf.angabe: Moritz Waldecker, Stefan Rues, Peter Rammelsberg and Wolfgang Bömicke
• E-Jahr: 2024
• Jahr: 27 August 2024
• Umfang: 12 S.
• Illustrationen: Illustrationen
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 07.02.2025
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Materials
• Ort Quelle: Basel : MDPI, 2008
• Jahr Quelle: 2024
• Band/Heft Quelle: 17(2024), 17, Artikel-ID 4221, Seite 1-12
• ISSN Quelle: 1996-1944
• DOI: doi:10.3390/ma17174221
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: accuracy
• Sach-SW: impression technique
• Sach-SW: polyether
• Sach-SW: vinyl polysiloxane
• K10plus-PPN: 1916632505

Abstract

Transferring the intraoral situation accurately to the dental laboratory is crucial for fabricating precise restorations. This study aimed to compare the dimensional accuracy of a new hydrophilic quadrofunctional vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) and polyether (PE), in combination with different impression techniques (mono-phase single step or dual-phase single step). The reference model simulated a partially edentulous mandible. Stainless-steel precision balls were welded to specific teeth and were used to detect dimensional deviations. Fifteen impressions were made for each of the following four test groups: (1) VPS mono-phase, (2) PE mono-phase, (3) VPS dual-phase, and (4) PE dual-phase. Global accuracy was measured by deviations from the reference model, while local accuracy focused on the trueness and precision of abutment tooth surfaces. Statistical analysis was conducted using ANOVA (α = 0.05). All distances were underestimated, with the highest global inaccuracies for the cross-arch distance, ranging from −82 µm to −109 µm. The abutment tooth surfaces showed excellent local accuracy for all the materials and techniques, with crown surface trueness < 10 µm and precision < 12 µm. Inlay surfaces had higher inaccuracies (trueness < 15 µm, precision < 26 µm). Within the limitations of this study, all impression materials and techniques can be used to produce models with clinically acceptable accuracy.