Abstract
ObjectivesThis study investigated the possible interactions between three addition silicone materials (Express®, Aquasil Ultra® and Adsil®), three hemostatic agents (ferric sulfate, StatGel FS®; aluminum sulfate, GelCord®; and aluminum chloride, Hemostop®) and gingival retraction cords previously handled with latex gloves to determine whether direct contact with medicaments or indirect contamination by latex in conditions similar to those found in clinical practice inhibit or affect the setting of the impression materials. Material and MethodsA portable device for the simultaneous test of several specimens was specifically developed for this study. Polymerization inhibition was analyzed by examination of the impressions and the molded surface. Ten trials were performed for each addition silicone material used in the study, at a total of 240 study samples. ResultsAll the samples tested (N=240) were nonreactive regardless of the type of combination used. ConclusionsAluminum sulfate, ferric sulfate and aluminum chloride hemostatic solutions did not show any inhibitory potential on the addition silicone samples under study, and there were no changes in polymerization as a result of contact between addition silicone and retraction cords handled with latex gloves.
Highlights
Addition silicone stands out among impression materials because of its excellent accuracy and stability[7]
The direct or indirect contact with latex gloves or rubber dams seems to increase the risk of polyvinylsiloxane polymerization inhibition[5,6,9,13,16,18-20,22,25-27], which is an important problem because latex gloves are some of the protective gear most often worn by dental professionals[10]
This study investigated the possible interactions between addition silicone materials from three different suppliers (Express®, Aquasil Ultra® and Adsil®), three hemostatic agents and gingival retraction cords previously handled with latex gloves to determine whether direct contact with medicaments or indirect contamination with latex in conditions similar to those found in clinical practice inhibit or affect the setting of vinyl polysiloxane materials
Summary
Addition silicone stands out among impression materials because of its excellent accuracy and stability[7]. Inhibitory changes have been assigned to the contact of addition silicone with other products used in clinical dentistry, such as zinc-oxide eugenol temporary cements[11], surfactants[21], retraction cords contaminated with latex[14] and glass-ionomer cements[17]. The direct or indirect contact with latex gloves or rubber dams seems to increase the risk of polyvinylsiloxane polymerization inhibition[5,6,9,13,16,18-20,22,25-27], which is an important problem because latex gloves are some of the protective gear most often worn by dental professionals[10]. The hypothesis more frequently accepted is that polymerization inhibition is explained by the contamination and poisoning of the metal catalyst in the addition silicone by diethyldithiocarbamate, a sulfur-containing component that is incorporated during the vulcanization of gloves and rubber dams[1,4,7,8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
