WETTABILITY OF POLYVINYLSILOXANE IMPRESSION MATERIALS AND IMPROVED STONE MATERIALS.
- Author:
Lee Ra CHO
1
;
Kyung Ho CHUNG
;
Kyoung Nam KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Kangnung National University, Department of Polymer Engineering, University of Suwon, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
improved stone;
polyvinyl siloxane impression material;
sulcus reproduction ability;
wettability
- MeSH:
Milk;
Molar;
Reproduction;
Silicones;
Tooth;
Wettability*
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2000;38(2):191-199
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
Wettability of addition silicone impression material is very important property for making an accurate restoration. This study examined the impression quality in clinical condition and the wet tability of impression and die material. Four commercially available addition silicone impression material (Express, Examix, Contrast, Perfect) and three die materials (Die-Keen, Vel-Mix, FujiRock) were studied. A total of 50 putty/wash and heavy body/wash impressions of wet intact permanent molar teeth were examined for definition of the gingival sulcus reproduction and then classified in quality ranking. The percentage of the sulcus reproduction ability of each material was calculated from the sulcus depths of cross-sectioned epoxy resin casts from the impressions and clinically measured sulcus depths. The same impression materials were used to produce 3 groups of die stone casts form void entrapment die had been exposed to milk. Voids in the impression. body and stone casts were counted under a stereoscopic microscope. From the experiment, the following results were obtained 1. Sulcus reproduction ability of additional silicone impression material were diminished in order of Express, Examix, Perfect, Contrast. The significant difference was found between Perfect and other material. Heavy body/wash combination was superior to putty/wash method in Perfect impression material. 2. In direct observation, bontrast showed least void in impression body but correlations were not found between sulcus reproduction and void production. 3. In void entrapment laboratory test, wettability were diminished in order of Examix, Contrast, Express, Perfect. Clinical impression recording seems not to correlate with laboratory test. 4. The wettability of die material to impression material was not different in Express, Examix, Contrast. But, in Perfect, Die-Keen had superior wettability to others.
