Randomized controlled clinical trial on the three-dimensional accuracy of fast-set impression materials.

OBJECTIVES

The use of fast-setting impression materials with different viscosities for the one-stage impression technique demands precise working times when mixing. We examined the effect of varying working time on impression precision in a randomized clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Focusing on tooth 46, three impressions were made from each of 96 volunteers, using either a polyether (PE: Impregum Penta H/L DuoSoft Quick, 3 M ESPE) or an addition-curing silicone (AS: Aquasil Ultra LV, Dentsply/DeTrey), one with the manufacturer's recommended working time (used as a reference) and two with altered working times. All stages of the impression-taking were subject to randomization. The three-dimensional precision of the non-standard working time impressions was digitally analyzed compared to the reference impression. Statistical analysis was performed using multivariate models.

RESULTS

The mean difference in the position of the lower right first molar (vs. the reference impression) ranged from ±12 μm for PE to +19 and -14 μm for AS. Significantly higher mean values (+62 to -40 μm) were found for AS compared to PE (+21 to -26 μm) in the area of the distal adjacent tooth.

CONCLUSIONS

Fast-set impression materials offer high precision when used for single tooth restorations as part of a one-stage impression technique, even when the working time (mixing plus application of the light- and heavy-body components) diverges significantly from the manufacturer's recommended protocol.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Best accuracy was achieved with machine-mixed heavy-body/light-body polyether. Both materials examined met the clinical requirements regarding precision when the teeth were completely syringed with light material.