Suppr超能文献

新配制的快速凝固弹性印模材料的准确性。

Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials.

作者信息

Wadhwani Chandur P K, Johnson Glen H, Lepe Xavier, Raigrodski Ariel J

机构信息

School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, 98195. USA.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Jun;93(6):530-9. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.03.007.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Elastomeric impression materials have been reformulated to achieve a faster set. The accuracy of fast-setting elastomeric impression materials should be confirmed, particularly with respect to disinfection.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of 2 types of fast-setting impression materials when disinfected with acid glutaraldehyde.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Impressions of the mandibular arch of a modified dentoform master model were made, from which gypsum working casts and dies were formed. Measurements of the master model and working casts included anteroposterior (AP) and cross-arch (CA) dimensions. A stainless steel circular crown preparation incorporated within the master model was measured in buccolingual (BL), mesiodistal (MD), and occlusogingival (OG) dimensions and compared to measurements from recovered gypsum dies. The impression materials examined were a fast-set vinyl polysiloxane (VPS-FS, Aquasil Ultra Fast Set), a fast-set polyether (PE-FS, Impregum Penta Soft Quick Step), and a regular-setting polyether as a control (PE, Impregum Penta). Disinfection involved immersion in 3.5% acid glutaraldehyde (Banicide Advanced) for 20 minutes, and nondisinfected impressions served as a control. Linear measurements were made with a measuring microscope. Statistical analysis utilized a 2-way and single-factor analysis of variance with pair-wise comparison of mean values when appropriate. Hypothesis testing was conducted at alpha = .05

RESULTS

No differences were shown between the disinfected and nondisinfected conditions for all locations. However, there were statistical differences among the 3 materials for AP, CA, MD, and OG dimensions. AP and CA dimensions of all working casts were larger than the master model. Impressions produced oval-shaped working dies for all impression materials. PE and PE-FS working dies were larger in all dimensions compared to the stainless steel preparation, whereas VPS-FS-generated working dies were reduced in OG and MD dimensions. Differences detected were small and may not be of clinical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Impression material accuracy was unaffected by immersion disinfection. The working casts and dies were similar for PE and PE-FS. VPS-FS generated gypsum dies that were smaller in 2 of the 3 dimensions measured and may require additional die relief. Overall accuracy was acceptable for all 3 impression materials.

摘要

问题陈述

弹性印模材料已重新配方以实现更快凝固。快速凝固弹性印模材料的准确性应得到确认,尤其是在消毒方面。

目的

本研究的目的是评估两种快速凝固印模材料用酸性戊二醛消毒后的准确性。

材料与方法

制作改良牙形主模型下颌弓的印模,并用其制作石膏工作模型和铸模。主模型和工作模型的测量包括前后(AP)和跨弓(CA)尺寸。在主模型中纳入的不锈钢圆形牙冠预备体,测量其颊舌(BL)、近远中(MD)和咬合龈向(OG)尺寸,并与从回收的石膏铸模上测量的尺寸进行比较。所检查的印模材料为快速凝固乙烯基聚硅氧烷(VPS-FS,Aquasil Ultra Fast Set)、快速凝固聚醚(PE-FS,Impregum Penta Soft Quick Step),以及常规凝固聚醚作为对照(PE,Impregum Penta)。消毒方法为将印模浸泡在3.5%酸性戊二醛(Banicide Advanced)中20分钟,未消毒的印模作为对照。使用测量显微镜进行线性测量。统计分析采用双向和单因素方差分析,并在适当情况下对平均值进行成对比较。假设检验在α = 0.05水平进行。

结果

所有部位消毒和未消毒条件之间均未显示出差异。然而,三种材料在AP、CA、MD和OG尺寸上存在统计学差异。所有工作模型的AP和CA尺寸均大于主模型。所有印模材料制作出的工作铸模均为椭圆形。与不锈钢预备体相比,PE和PE-FS工作铸模在所有尺寸上均更大,而VPS-FS制作的工作铸模在OG和MD尺寸上减小。检测到的差异较小,可能不具有临床意义。

结论

浸泡消毒不影响印模材料的准确性。PE和PE-FS的工作模型和铸模相似。VPS-FS制作的石膏铸模在测量的三个尺寸中的两个尺寸上较小,可能需要额外的铸模脱模处理。所有三种印模材料的总体准确性均可接受。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验