Cargando…
Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis
Background: This study was aimed at comparing the accuracy of impressions of a reference typodont (RT) reproducing a totally edentulous maxilla made with three impression materials: polysulfide, polyether, and polyvinyl-siloxane. Methods: The RT was scanned using a desktop scanner, obtaining a refer...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7040790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31978974 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13030515 |
_version_ | 1783501063070941184 |
---|---|
author | Zarone, Fernando Ruggiero, Gennaro Di Mauro, Maria Irene Spagnuolo, Gianrico Ferrari, Marco Sorrentino, Roberto |
author_facet | Zarone, Fernando Ruggiero, Gennaro Di Mauro, Maria Irene Spagnuolo, Gianrico Ferrari, Marco Sorrentino, Roberto |
author_sort | Zarone, Fernando |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: This study was aimed at comparing the accuracy of impressions of a reference typodont (RT) reproducing a totally edentulous maxilla made with three impression materials: polysulfide, polyether, and polyvinyl-siloxane. Methods: The RT was scanned using a desktop scanner, obtaining a reference scan. Ten impressions for each of the three tested materials were made using a mechanical device with a standardized and consistent modality. A laboratory scanner performed the digitization of each impression. We produced digital models by processing “in reverse” the scans of the physical impressions using a dedicated software, obtaining three groups (n = 10), respectively. The groups were titled: “polysulfide,” “polyvinyl-siloxane,” and “polyether”. The scans in .stl format were imported into Geomagic Control X and then compared to RT to evaluate the accuracy of each scan by calculating trueness and precision in µm. Recorded data were subjected to descriptive statistics. Results: Trueness (arithmetic proximity) values (95%CI) were: polysulfide = 249.9 (121.3–378.5), polyvinyl-siloxane = 216.8 (123.1–310.6), polyether = 291.1 (219.9–362.3). Precision values (95% CI) were: polysulfide = 261.9 (108.8–415), polyvinyl-siloxane = 209.4 (111.9–306.8), polyether = 283 (227.9–338.1). Statistically significant differences were not detected between the means of the experimental groups, both for trueness and precision. Conclusions: The accuracy of the scans obtained from polyvinyl-siloxane, polysulfide, and polyether impressions can be considered comparable in a fully edentulous maxilla. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7040790 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70407902020-03-09 Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis Zarone, Fernando Ruggiero, Gennaro Di Mauro, Maria Irene Spagnuolo, Gianrico Ferrari, Marco Sorrentino, Roberto Materials (Basel) Article Background: This study was aimed at comparing the accuracy of impressions of a reference typodont (RT) reproducing a totally edentulous maxilla made with three impression materials: polysulfide, polyether, and polyvinyl-siloxane. Methods: The RT was scanned using a desktop scanner, obtaining a reference scan. Ten impressions for each of the three tested materials were made using a mechanical device with a standardized and consistent modality. A laboratory scanner performed the digitization of each impression. We produced digital models by processing “in reverse” the scans of the physical impressions using a dedicated software, obtaining three groups (n = 10), respectively. The groups were titled: “polysulfide,” “polyvinyl-siloxane,” and “polyether”. The scans in .stl format were imported into Geomagic Control X and then compared to RT to evaluate the accuracy of each scan by calculating trueness and precision in µm. Recorded data were subjected to descriptive statistics. Results: Trueness (arithmetic proximity) values (95%CI) were: polysulfide = 249.9 (121.3–378.5), polyvinyl-siloxane = 216.8 (123.1–310.6), polyether = 291.1 (219.9–362.3). Precision values (95% CI) were: polysulfide = 261.9 (108.8–415), polyvinyl-siloxane = 209.4 (111.9–306.8), polyether = 283 (227.9–338.1). Statistically significant differences were not detected between the means of the experimental groups, both for trueness and precision. Conclusions: The accuracy of the scans obtained from polyvinyl-siloxane, polysulfide, and polyether impressions can be considered comparable in a fully edentulous maxilla. MDPI 2020-01-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7040790/ /pubmed/31978974 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13030515 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Zarone, Fernando Ruggiero, Gennaro Di Mauro, Maria Irene Spagnuolo, Gianrico Ferrari, Marco Sorrentino, Roberto Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title | Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title_full | Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title_fullStr | Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title_short | Accuracy of Three Impression Materials on the Totally Edentulous Maxilla: In Vitro/In Silico Comparative Analysis |
title_sort | accuracy of three impression materials on the totally edentulous maxilla: in vitro/in silico comparative analysis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7040790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31978974 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13030515 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zaronefernando accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis AT ruggierogennaro accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis AT dimauromariairene accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis AT spagnuologianrico accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis AT ferrarimarco accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis AT sorrentinoroberto accuracyofthreeimpressionmaterialsonthetotallyedentulousmaxillainvitroinsilicocomparativeanalysis |