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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |