Department of Dental Materials, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Zhermapol Dental Materials, Warsaw, Poland.
J Prosthodont. 2018 Feb;27(2):182-188. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12471. Epub 2016 Jun 22.
The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents.
The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).
The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents.
The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
化学性牙龈边缘位移剂与聚醚印模材料的相容性尚未确定。本研究旨在评估接触常规和实验性牙龈位移剂后聚醚印模弹性体的凝固时间。
本研究比较了两种聚醚印模材料的凝固时间:中体(Impregum Penta Soft)和轻体(Impregum Garant L DuoSoft)接触 10 种牙龈位移剂后的凝固时间,包括 5 种常规收敛剂(10%、20%和 25%氯化铝、25%硫酸铝和 15.5%硫酸铁)和 5 种实验性肾上腺素能剂(0.1%和 0.01%盐酸肾上腺素、0.05%盐酸四氢唑啉、0.05%盐酸羟甲唑啉和 10%盐酸苯肾上腺素)。将 120 个样本(60 个轻体和 60 个中体)与每种牙龈位移剂的 20μl 混合,使用粘度计测量达到最大粘度的时间。将这些样本的凝固时间与 12 个未接触位移剂的对照组进行比较。实验在 23°C 和 37°C(±0.1°C)两种环境下进行。计算个体和平均聚合时间兼容性指数(PTCI)。数据采用双因素方差分析(α=0.05)进行分析。
来自两个组的评估化学位移剂改变了轻体和中体 PE 的凝固时间。在两种温度环境下,两种 PE 均对收敛剂(20%氯化铝)产生了负的个体 PTCI 值。实验性位移剂在实验室和口腔内温度下的平均 PTCI 值明显高于常规剂。
本研究结果表明,实验性收缩剂可作为牙龈边缘位移剂推荐用于临床,对中体和轻体聚醚印模材料的凝固时间影响最小;然而,应避免化学位移剂和聚醚印模材料的直接接触。