Cargando…

Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique

Objective. To investigate the accuracy of dies obtained from single-step and 2-step double-mix impressions. Material and Methods. Impressions (n = 10) of a stainless steel die simulating a complete crown preparation were performed using a polyether (Impregum Soft Heavy and Light body) and a vinyl po...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Franco, Eduardo Batista, da Cunha, Leonardo Fernandes, Herrera, Francyle Simões, Benetti, Ana Raquel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Scholarly Research Network 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3169190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21991468
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/341546
_version_ 1782211457525481472
author Franco, Eduardo Batista
da Cunha, Leonardo Fernandes
Herrera, Francyle Simões
Benetti, Ana Raquel
author_facet Franco, Eduardo Batista
da Cunha, Leonardo Fernandes
Herrera, Francyle Simões
Benetti, Ana Raquel
author_sort Franco, Eduardo Batista
collection PubMed
description Objective. To investigate the accuracy of dies obtained from single-step and 2-step double-mix impressions. Material and Methods. Impressions (n = 10) of a stainless steel die simulating a complete crown preparation were performed using a polyether (Impregum Soft Heavy and Light body) and a vinyl polysiloxane (Perfectim Blue Velvet and Flexi-Velvet) in two consistencies, in one or two (without relief) steps. Accuracy of the stone dies was accessed at a measuring microscope, using a metallic crown with perfect fit to the reference crown preparation. Data were submitted to 2-way ANOVA and Tukey test (α = 0.05). Results. The single-step technique resulted in slightly larger dies, while the 2-step technique without relief produced significantly smaller dies, when compared to the original stainless steel die. Stone dies obtained from 2-step polyether impressions were significantly smaller when compared to dies obtained from 2-step vinyl polysiloxane impressions (Impregum 2-step: −290.94 ± 71.64 μm; Perfectim 2-step: −201.86 ± 28.58 μm). No significant differences were observed in dies obtained from either polyether or vinyl polysiloxane with the single-step technique (Impregum single-step: 63.52 ± 16.60 μm; Perfectim single-step: 79.40 ± 14.11 μm). Conclusion. Higher discrepancies were detected for the 2-step impression technique without relief for the investigated materials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3169190
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher International Scholarly Research Network
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31691902011-10-11 Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique Franco, Eduardo Batista da Cunha, Leonardo Fernandes Herrera, Francyle Simões Benetti, Ana Raquel ISRN Dent Research Article Objective. To investigate the accuracy of dies obtained from single-step and 2-step double-mix impressions. Material and Methods. Impressions (n = 10) of a stainless steel die simulating a complete crown preparation were performed using a polyether (Impregum Soft Heavy and Light body) and a vinyl polysiloxane (Perfectim Blue Velvet and Flexi-Velvet) in two consistencies, in one or two (without relief) steps. Accuracy of the stone dies was accessed at a measuring microscope, using a metallic crown with perfect fit to the reference crown preparation. Data were submitted to 2-way ANOVA and Tukey test (α = 0.05). Results. The single-step technique resulted in slightly larger dies, while the 2-step technique without relief produced significantly smaller dies, when compared to the original stainless steel die. Stone dies obtained from 2-step polyether impressions were significantly smaller when compared to dies obtained from 2-step vinyl polysiloxane impressions (Impregum 2-step: −290.94 ± 71.64 μm; Perfectim 2-step: −201.86 ± 28.58 μm). No significant differences were observed in dies obtained from either polyether or vinyl polysiloxane with the single-step technique (Impregum single-step: 63.52 ± 16.60 μm; Perfectim single-step: 79.40 ± 14.11 μm). Conclusion. Higher discrepancies were detected for the 2-step impression technique without relief for the investigated materials. International Scholarly Research Network 2011 2011-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3169190/ /pubmed/21991468 http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/341546 Text en Copyright © 2011 Eduardo Batista Franco et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Franco, Eduardo Batista
da Cunha, Leonardo Fernandes
Herrera, Francyle Simões
Benetti, Ana Raquel
Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title_full Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title_fullStr Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title_short Accuracy of Single-Step versus 2-Step Double-Mix Impression Technique
title_sort accuracy of single-step versus 2-step double-mix impression technique
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3169190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21991468
http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2011/341546
work_keys_str_mv AT francoeduardobatista accuracyofsinglestepversus2stepdoublemiximpressiontechnique
AT dacunhaleonardofernandes accuracyofsinglestepversus2stepdoublemiximpressiontechnique
AT herrerafrancylesimoes accuracyofsinglestepversus2stepdoublemiximpressiontechnique
AT benettianaraquel accuracyofsinglestepversus2stepdoublemiximpressiontechnique