Contact angle of unset elastomeric impression materials

Menees, Timothy S.; Radhakrishnan, Rashmi; Ramp, Lance C.; Burgess, John O.; Lawson, Nathaniel C.

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.05.004

Cited by 21 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The PVXE materials, studied now, similar to PE but not PVS, show only slight changes between 50 and 80 s experimental working time indicating predominance of the PVXEs' polyether characteristic. Menees et al, similar to our wettability results, reported about lower contact angles of water on PVXE light body compared to polyether 17) . PVS materials show higher initial contact angles than PE and PVXE, which is in line with findings for PVS within comparable working times 14,17) .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…The hydrophilicity of the unset polyethers measured in this study confirms earlier study results where a constant hydrophilicity could be ascribed to polyethers in course of the working time 7,14,17) . However, this was not the case for many polyvinyl siloxanes where changes of their contact angles towards hydrophobicity within working time were reported 7) .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A modified shark-fin test simulating the single-step/double-mix technique: A comparison of three groups of elastomers

Huettig

Chekhani

Klink

et al. 2018

Dental Materials Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The shark-fin test was modified to convey the clinical application of a single-step/double-mix technique assessing the behavior of two viscosities applied at one point in time. A medium and light body polyether (PE), a medium and light body polyvinylsiloxane (PVS), and a medium as well as heavy and light body vinyl polyether silicone (PVXE) impression material were analyzed solely, and in a layered mixture of 1:1 and 3:1 at working times of 50, 80, and 120 s. The fin heights were measured with a digital ruler. The wettability was measured 50 and 80 s after mixing by drop shape analysis. The results showed a synergistic effect of the medium and light body PE. This was not observed in PVXE and PVS. Interestingly, PVXE showed an antagonistic flow behavior in 3:1 mixture with medium body. PVXE was more hydrophilic than PE and PVS. Future rheological studies should clarify the detected flow effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

A modified shark-fin test simulating the single-step/double-mix technique: A comparison of three groups of elastomers

Huettig

Chekhani

Klink

et al. 2018

Dental Materials Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using artificial saliva instead of water as the testing liquid is due to the different reactions to surfactants. As reported, unlike water, saliva includes dissolver proteins and salts and cannot dissolve the surfactant released from VPS materials easier than water 14) . Therefore, the contact angle obtained using artificial saliva is slightly higher compared to water.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The smaller dispersion size of the surfactant is more easily moved to the surface of the impression material, and it can increase the wettability of materials. In addition, the alteration in the composition and concentration of surfactant could influence the wettability of impression materials 14,21) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Static and dynamic evaluations of the wettability of commercial vinyl polysiloxane impression materials for artificial saliva

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the wettability of commercial vinyl polysiloxane impression materials by measuring contact angles on horizontal and non-horizontal surfaces using artificial saliva. Three light bodies (Affinis [Affi], Silagum [Sila] and Variotime [Vario-LB]) and one extra light body (Viriotime [Vario-ELB]) were prepared with flat surfaces. Static and dynamic contact angles were measured using the sessile drop method as a function of time. Contact angle hysteresis was the value of advancing contact angle minus receding contact angle. The results indicated that all materials were classified as hydrophilic materials. Vario-ELB and Affi showed better initial wettability than the other two materials. Vario-ELB showed more hydrophilic properties and was more vulnerable to changes in the intraoral environment compared to Affi, Sila and Vario-LB. These results suggest that measuring the time-dependent dynamic contact angle on the inclined surface can provide effective information regarding the wettability of impression materials to evaluate their clinical performance.

show abstract

Experimental hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) impression materials incorporating a novel surfactant compared with commercial VPS

Din

Parker²,

Braden³

et al. 2017

Dental Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Contact angle of unset elastomeric impression materials

Cited by 21 publications

References 16 publications

A modified shark-fin test simulating the single-step/double-mix technique: A comparison of three groups of elastomers

A modified shark-fin test simulating the single-step/double-mix technique: A comparison of three groups of elastomers

Static and dynamic evaluations of the wettability of commercial vinyl polysiloxane impression materials for artificial saliva

Experimental hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) impression materials incorporating a novel surfactant compared with commercial VPS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About