Evaluation of Elastomeric Impression Materials’ Hydrophilicity: An in vitro Study

Theocharidou, Anna; Tzimas, Konstantinos; Tolidis, Kosmas; Tortopidis, Dimitrios

doi:10.15644/asc55/3/3

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The hydrophilic or wettable characteristics of impression materials also contribute to passively fitting impressions. The hydrophilicity was measured by determining the contact angle of a drop of water on the material under observation [ 17 ]. The lower the hydrophilicity, the larger the angle, and the higher the discrepancy in the impression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Properties of a novel composite elastomeric polymer vinyl polyether siloxane in comparison to its parent materials: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Saini,

Alshadidi,

Hassan

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The effectiveness of newly developed elastomeric polymer hybrid siloxane (PVES), which combines the properties of polyethylene (PE) and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) elastomers, has been a subject of interest in recent studies. This study aimed to assess the physical properties of hybrid PVES materials by analyzing existing data from recent studies on this topic. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted to retrieve peer-reviewed articles published up to February 5, 2023. The population, intervention, comparison, and pertinent outcomes were specified under the PICO framework. The primary data analysis was performed in Microsoft Excel, while statistical analysis used Meta-Essentials. Results Of the 1152 articles assessed, 14 met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the selected studies indicated that polyether (PE) and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) were highly correlated (two-tailed p-values of 0.000 and 0.001, respectively) with the improved tensile strength of vinyl polyether siloxane (PVES) with a significantly positive effect size. Similarly, the hydrophilic characteristics of PVES were significantly improved compared to those of PE and PVS. PE was a significant contributor to the hydrophilic characteristics of PVES, with a two-tailed p-value of 0.000. The effect size was highly positive for hydrophilicity but showed high heterogeneity. It was also observed that the dimensional accuracy of PVES was comparable to those of PE and PVS, with no statistically significant differences among the three materials. Conclusions PVES showed promising features, with improved tensile strength and hydrophilic characteristics compared to those of PE and PVS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Properties of a novel composite elastomeric polymer vinyl polyether siloxane in comparison to its parent materials: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Saini,

Alshadidi,

Hassan

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the properties of polyether are similar to polyvinyl siloxane, polyether is more hydrophilic. 31,32 Consequently, polyether can penetrate in moist conditions via ester functional groups (R-CO-OR) that are slightly positive polar molecules, that is, dipole-dipole force with water molecules. 16,18,31 On the other hand, polyvinyl siloxane is hydrophobic by nature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Abutment Finish Lines on the Penetration Characteristics of Elastomers into the Simulated Gingival Sulcus

Jaroenpiboon

Apinsathanon²,

Nan³

et al. 2023

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to determine the effect of finish lines on the penetration ability of polyether and polyvinyl siloxane impression material into the simulated gingival sulcus. Materials and Methods Three types of finish line (chamfer, deep chamfer, and radial shoulder) were impressed with two types of elastomeric impression material (polyether and polyvinyl siloxane) using a two-step impression technique. Ten samples of each finish line were prepared and then separated into two groups of impression material: polyether and polyvinyl siloxane. The model of the simulated gingival sulcus had a width of 0.1 mm and a depth of 3.5 mm with a subgingival finish line of 0.5 mm. The effect of the finish lines on the penetration ability of these impression materials was analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's multiple comparison tests at a statistically significant level of 0.05. Results A two-way ANOVA revealed a significant difference among finish lines, impression materials, and their interaction. The deep chamfer and radial shoulder finish lines displayed significantly higher penetration ability than the chamfer finish line. Moreover, polyether revealed significantly higher penetration ability than polyvinyl siloxane. Conclusion The finish lines affected the penetration ability of the impression materials. Therefore, the simulated gingival sulcus model demonstrates that it is an effective way of examining impression materials' penetration abilities.

show abstract

“…In 31 participants, impressions of the upper jaw were taken with two routinely used conventional impression materials-a polyether and a vinylpolysiloxane material-and two intraoral scanners. The two most routinely materials for high precision impressions were used for conventional impressions [40][41][42][43] . Polyether even gave more accurate impressions than polyvinylsiloxane.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trueness of full-arch dental models obtained by digital and conventional impression techniques: an in vivo study

Onbasi

Abu-Hossin

Paulig

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the trueness of complete- and partial-arch impressions obtained using conventional impression materials and intraoral scanners in vivo. Full-arch impressions were taken using polyether and polyvinylsiloxane. Gypsum casts were digitized using a laboratory scanner (IM, AF). Casts obtained from polyether impressions were also scanned using an industrial blue light scanner to construct 3D reference models. Intraoral scanning was performed using CEREC Omnicam (CO) and Trios 3 (TR). Surface matching software (Atos Professional) enabled to determine the mean deviations (mean distances) from the reference casts. Statistically significant discrepancies were calculated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The mean distance for trueness ranged from 0.005 mm (TR) to 0.023 mm (IM) for the full arch, from 0.001 mm (CO) to 0.068 mm (IM) for the anterior segment, and from 0.019 mm (AF) to 0.042 mm (IM) for the posterior segment. Comparing the anterior vs. the posterior segment, significantly less deviations were observed for anterior with CO (p < 0.001) and TR (p < 0.001). Full-arch comparisons revealed significant differences between AF vs. IM (p = 0.014), IM vs. CO (p = 0.002), and IM vs. TR (p = 0.001). Full-arch trueness was comparable when using Affinis and the two intraoral scanners CEREC Omnicam and Trios 3. The digital impression devices yielded higher local deviations within the complete arch. Digital impressions of the complete arch are a suitable and reliable alternative to conventional impressions. However, they should be used with caution in the posterior region.Trial registration: Registration number at the German Clinical Trial Register (04.02.2022): DRKS00027988 (https://trialsearch.who.int/).

show abstract

Evaluation of Elastomeric Impression Materials’ Hydrophilicity: An in vitro Study

Cited by 4 publications

References 25 publications

Properties of a novel composite elastomeric polymer vinyl polyether siloxane in comparison to its parent materials: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Properties of a novel composite elastomeric polymer vinyl polyether siloxane in comparison to its parent materials: a systemic review and meta-analysis

The Effects of Abutment Finish Lines on the Penetration Characteristics of Elastomers into the Simulated Gingival Sulcus

Trueness of full-arch dental models obtained by digital and conventional impression techniques: an in vivo study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About