Qualitative and quantitative three-dimensional accuracy of a single tooth captured by elastomeric impression materials: An in vitro study

Digitization of dental alginate impression: Three-dimensional evaluation of point cloud

“…Furthermore, such data aids dentists in the planning and evaluation of treatment, and improves treatment outcome 15) . 3-D superimpositional software, which enables an extremely precise comparison and analysis of irregular and geometric shapes, has been utilized to evaluate such data 9,12,[16][17][18][19] . The analysis software used in this study (PowerINSPECT) allows measurements to be obtained on STL files and triangle models, used in each part and product, as well as rapid prototyping.…”

“…Furthermore, the validity of a system that analyzes the 3-dimensional (3-D) surface model, developed by the utilization of laser scanning, has also been reported 10) . The majority of previous studies on the digitization of impressions have focused on rubber impressions [11][12][13][14] ; relatively few studies have scanned the alginate impressions used frequently in current dental practice. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the digitization of alginate impressions by analyzing differences in scan data between two types of impressions (alginate and rubber) taken from the master die and the scan data for the master die.…”

Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of casts made by digital and conventional methods

“…9 However, vinyl siloxanether material has been shown to have better dimensional accuracy than either polyether or polyvinyl siloxane. 9,10 Although the setting expansion of contemporary Type IV die stones is intended to match the polymerization shrinkage of vinyl siloxanether elastomeric impression materials, 11 working cast dimensions have been shown to be oversized when compared to the original tooth. 10 Recently, equipment (Lava C.O.S.…”

Performance of dental impression materials: Benchmarking of materials and techniques by three-dimensional analysis

“…The analysis of materials for final impressions requires the use of micro-computed tomography (µ-CT) data 7) or non-contact optical digitizing based on the projection, reflection and detection of structured light and from different light sources. The latter can be applied for the detection of small differences, as found in the comparison of implant impression techniques 8) , changes in gypsum materials over time 9) , the accuracy of impression techniques 10) , or the influence of impression material type 11) . High-precision touch-probe digitizers can be used for mechanical digitizing 12) as long as the materials to be examined are not prone to wear or insufficient resistance against the contact pressure applied with the probe of the mechanical digitizer 13) .…”

“…The full picture of the dimensional accuracy can only be achieved with 3D analyses, which should be used for the characterization of the dimensional stability and accuracy of impression materials, especially where materials for final impressions are concerned 36) . Three-dimensional in vitro analyses overcoming the 2D limitations focused on different impression Performance of dental impression materials: Benchmarking of materials and techniques by three-dimensional analysis materials 7,11,12,37) , impression techniques 10) , impression trays 34,38) , and aspects of implant impression accuracy 8,36,39,40) . Because of a greater tolerance towards dimensional changes, the requirements for impression materials for diagnostic casts differ from those for final impressions.…”