Abstract
Background: This study was to evaluate the impression quality and clinical success of 2 Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression materials by using dual-viscosity 1-step impression technique and the putty-wash two-step impression technique. Methods: In this study, Variotime (Heraeus, Hanau, Germany) and a novel silicone Spirias (Imicryl, Konya, Turkey) were selected as PVS impression materials. A total of 40 samples were divided into groups according to the impression technique. Three possible categories were established to rate the impression quality. The impression was examined using a laboratory microscope (Opmi Pico, Zeiss) and lenses with 2X to 6X magnification for the presence or absence of bubbles or voids and the complete reproduction of the preparation finish line. A spreadsheet (Excel v2016; Microsoft Corp) was used for processing statistical data. Results of the analysis were calculated as mean and frequency. Results: In the impressions taken with Variotime, the percentage of the successful impression is 95% (Criteria I - II). Only one impression was found unacceptable (criteria III). In impressions with Spirias, the percentage of successful impressions is 100% (Criteria I - II). No impression was found unacceptable (criterion III). Conclusion: The quality of impressions of both brands Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials revealed a high rate (97.5%) For more precise results, many new studies were needed on different Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials.
Highlights
Impressions made to replicate the condition of teeth and surrounding tissues are a main part of prosthetic dentistry
The quality of impressions of both brands Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials revealed a high rate (97.5%) For more precise results, many new studies were needed on different Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials
The Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) material used in this study offers good wettability and flow behavior in dental tissue
Summary
Impressions made to replicate the condition of teeth and surrounding tissues are a main part of prosthetic dentistry. Making the impression is a critical clinical step to accurately record the three-dimensional intraoral relationships among teeth and surrounding structures [1]. Laboratory errors that lead to incompatibility in indirect restorations are most often the result of inaccuracies that occur during the impressions [1, 2, 3]. Many factors, such as the experience and skill of clinicians, proper material handling, the choice of impression materials, technique, working time, and the patient’s compliance, affect the acceptability of the impression [3]. This study was to evaluate the impression quality and clinical success of 2 Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression materials by using dual-viscosity 1-step impression technique and the putty-wash two-step impression technique
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
