PURPOSE: Vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) has a different composition from other elastomeric impression materials as it combines vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) and polyether (PE). Therefore, it is important to study its properties and behavior under different test conditions. This study investigated the dimensional stability of 5 VPES consistencies when stored for up to 2 weeks, with and without using a standard disinfection procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 40 discs of each VPES consistency (total 200) were made using a stainless steel die and ring as described by ANSI /ADA specification No. 19. 20 discs of each material were immersed in a 2.5% buffered glutaraldehyde solution for 30 minutes. Dimensional stability measurements were calculated immediately after fabrication and repeated on the same discs after 7 and 14 days of storage. The data was analyzed using two-way ANOVA with a significance level set at α = 0.05. RESULTS: The discs mean contraction was below 0.5% at all test times ranging from 0.200 ± 0.014 to 0.325 ± 0.007. Repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference after 2-week storage between the disinfected and non-disinfected groups (P < .001). Although there was no statistically significant difference between the materials at the time of fabrication, the contraction of the materials increased with storage for 1 and 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: The dimensional changes of VPES impression discs after disinfection and prolonged storage complied with ANSI/ADA standard. The tested VPES impression materials were dimensionally stable for clinical use after disinfection for 30 minutes in glutaraldehyde and storage for up to 2 weeks.
Disinfection* ; Elastomers ; Glutaral ; Silicon* ; Silicones* ; Siloxanes ; Stainless Steel

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the diagnostic tools available for assessing maxillary transverse deficiencies. METHODS: An electronic search of three databases was performed from their date of establishment to April 2015, with manual searching of reference lists of relevant articles. Articles were considered for inclusion if they reported the accuracy or reliability of a diagnostic method or evaluation technique for maxillary transverse dimensions in mixed or permanent dentitions. Risk of bias was assessed in the included articles, using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool-2. RESULTS: Nine articles were selected. The studies were heterogeneous, with moderate to low methodological quality, and all had a high risk of bias. Four suggested that the use of arch width prediction indices with dental cast measurements is unreliable for use in diagnosis. Frontal cephalograms derived from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were reportedly more reliable for assessing intermaxillary transverse discrepancies than posteroanterior cephalograms. Two studies proposed new three-dimensional transverse analyses with CBCT images that were reportedly reliable, but have not been validated for clinical sensitivity or specificity. No studies reported sensitivity, specificity, positive or negative predictive values or likelihood ratios, or ROC curves of the methods for the diagnosis of transverse deficiencies. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence does not enable solid conclusions to be drawn, owing to a lack of reliable high quality diagnostic studies evaluating maxillary transverse deficiencies. CBCT images are reportedly more reliable for diagnosis, but further validation is required to confirm CBCT's accuracy and diagnostic superiority.
Bias (Epidemiology) ; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography ; Dentition ; Diagnosis ; Methods* ; ROC Curve ; Sensitivity and Specificity

Objective: To identify optimal areas for the insertion of extra-alveolar miniscrews into the infrazygomatic crest (IZC) and mandibular buccal shelf (MBS), using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging in patients with different craniofacial patterns. Methods: CBCT reconstructions of untreated individuals were used to evaluate the IZC and MBS areas. The participants were divided into three groups, based on the craniofacial pattern, namely, brachyfacial (n = 15; mean age, 23.3 years), mesofacial (n = 15; mean age, 19.24 years), and dolichofacial (n = 15; mean age, 17.79 years). In the IZC, the evaluated areas were at 11, 13, and 15 mm above the buccal cusp tips of the right and left first molars. In the MBS, the evaluated areas were at the projections of the first molars’ distal roots and second molars’ mesial and distal roots, at a 4- and 8-mm distance from the cementoenamel junction. Intergroup comparisons were performed with analysis of variance and the Tukey test. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the IZC bone thickness among the groups. For MBS bone availability, some comparisons revealed no difference; meanwhile, other comparisons revealed increased MBS bone thickness in the brachyfacial (first molars distal roots) and dolichofacial (second molars mesial and distal roots) patterns. Conclusions There was no significant difference in the IZC bone thickness among the groups. The facial skeletal pattern may affect the availability of ideal bone thickness for the insertion of extra-alveolar miniscrews in the MBS region; however, this variability is unlikely to be clinically meaningful.