An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study
Background: Impressions are an integral part of prosthodontics. Elastomeric impression materials are the impressions materials of choice in fixed prosthodontics for its better surface detail reproduction. Out of the elastomers available, vinyl polysiloxane represents the state of art impression mate...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2018-01-01
|
Series: | Indian Journal of Dental Sciences |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.ijds.in/article.asp?issn=0976-4003;year=2018;volume=10;issue=1;spage=37;epage=41;aulast=Shanthana |
id |
doaj-eff4d82967344d73aef440c0b6f56fbd |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-eff4d82967344d73aef440c0b6f56fbd2020-11-25T00:03:49ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Dental Sciences0976-40032231-22932018-01-01101374110.4103/IJDS.IJDS_42_17An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro StudyC B Shanthana LakshmiB UmamaheswariAchut R DevarhubliSushant PaiTejendra Nandakumar WadambeBackground: Impressions are an integral part of prosthodontics. Elastomeric impression materials are the impressions materials of choice in fixed prosthodontics for its better surface detail reproduction. Out of the elastomers available, vinyl polysiloxane represents the state of art impression material in prosthodontics, but even these materials cannot give an accurate reproduction of the tissues if there is separation of impression materials from the tray which may results in a distorted impression leading to poor final restorations made from such impressions. Hence, tray adhesives need to be applied to the tray to obtain an accurate and consistent impression. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesive, by determining the tensile bond strength. Materials and Methods: Two acrylic discs were utilized to make one impression sample of 3 mm thickness. The dimension of each acrylic disc was 2 mm in thickness and 2 cm in diameter. Specimens were made using a standard stainless steel die of the above-mentioned dimensions. A total of 135 specimens were prepared which included 15 samples in each category of nine groups. The samples were subjected to tensile bond strength testing using the universal testing machine and the values were recorded. All the values were subjected for statistical analysis. Results: Impregum (3M) specimens had demonstrated the highest tensile bond strength value (51.60N). Statistical analysis was done using Tukey's post hoc test and one-way ANOVA. Highly Statistical significant results were evident in Impregum (3M) and Indentium, as the P = 0.00. Conclusion: In this study Impregum (3M), specimens had highest tensile bond strength values compared to the other Groups followed by Indentium.http://www.ijds.in/article.asp?issn=0976-4003;year=2018;volume=10;issue=1;spage=37;epage=41;aulast=ShanthanaAutopolymerizing resinhydrophilicvinyl siloxanether |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
C B Shanthana Lakshmi B Umamaheswari Achut R Devarhubli Sushant Pai Tejendra Nandakumar Wadambe |
spellingShingle |
C B Shanthana Lakshmi B Umamaheswari Achut R Devarhubli Sushant Pai Tejendra Nandakumar Wadambe An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study Indian Journal of Dental Sciences Autopolymerizing resin hydrophilic vinyl siloxanether |
author_facet |
C B Shanthana Lakshmi B Umamaheswari Achut R Devarhubli Sushant Pai Tejendra Nandakumar Wadambe |
author_sort |
C B Shanthana Lakshmi |
title |
An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study |
title_short |
An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study |
title_full |
An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study |
title_fullStr |
An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed |
An evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: An In vitro Study |
title_sort |
evaluation of compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesives: an in vitro study |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
series |
Indian Journal of Dental Sciences |
issn |
0976-4003 2231-2293 |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
Background: Impressions are an integral part of prosthodontics. Elastomeric impression materials are the impressions materials of choice in fixed prosthodontics for its better surface detail reproduction. Out of the elastomers available, vinyl polysiloxane represents the state of art impression material in prosthodontics, but even these materials cannot give an accurate reproduction of the tissues if there is separation of impression materials from the tray which may results in a distorted impression leading to poor final restorations made from such impressions. Hence, tray adhesives need to be applied to the tray to obtain an accurate and consistent impression. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the compatibility of three different impression materials to three different tray acrylic materials using tray adhesive, by determining the tensile bond strength. Materials and Methods: Two acrylic discs were utilized to make one impression sample of 3 mm thickness. The dimension of each acrylic disc was 2 mm in thickness and 2 cm in diameter. Specimens were made using a standard stainless steel die of the above-mentioned dimensions. A total of 135 specimens were prepared which included 15 samples in each category of nine groups. The samples were subjected to tensile bond strength testing using the universal testing machine and the values were recorded. All the values were subjected for statistical analysis. Results: Impregum (3M) specimens had demonstrated the highest tensile bond strength value (51.60N). Statistical analysis was done using Tukey's post hoc test and one-way ANOVA. Highly Statistical significant results were evident in Impregum (3M) and Indentium, as the P = 0.00. Conclusion: In this study Impregum (3M), specimens had highest tensile bond strength values compared to the other Groups followed by Indentium. |
topic |
Autopolymerizing resin hydrophilic vinyl siloxanether |
url |
http://www.ijds.in/article.asp?issn=0976-4003;year=2018;volume=10;issue=1;spage=37;epage=41;aulast=Shanthana |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT cbshanthanalakshmi anevaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT bumamaheswari anevaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT achutrdevarhubli anevaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT sushantpai anevaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT tejendranandakumarwadambe anevaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT cbshanthanalakshmi evaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT bumamaheswari evaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT achutrdevarhubli evaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT sushantpai evaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy AT tejendranandakumarwadambe evaluationofcompatibilityofthreedifferentimpressionmaterialstothreedifferenttrayacrylicmaterialsusingtrayadhesivesaninvitrostudy |
_version_ |
1725431866039730176 |