Journal of Korean Dental Science

Korean Academy of Dental Science (대한치의학회)
권호 표지

DIMENSIONAL STABILITY OF IMPRESSION BODY USING THE SILICONE INDEX TOOTH TRAY IMPRESSION SYSTEM

  • Lee, Kyu-Young (Department of Dentistry, College of Wonju Medicine, Yonsei University) ;
  • Jeong, Seung-Mi (Department of Dentistry, College of Wonju Medicine, Yonsei University) ;
  • Shim, June-Sung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Choi, Byeong-Gap (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee, Keun-Woo (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Han-Sung (Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Health Science, Yonsei University)
  • Published : 2008.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose : This study sought to evaluate the dimensional stability of the SITT (Silicone Index Tooth Tray) impression system and to determine whether providing space for wash impression material in SITT is a necessary step in obtaining accurate prostheses. Materials and methods : After mounting metal dies with shoulder and chamfer margins arbitrarily, SITT was fabricated using Blu-mousse$^{(R)}$. To test the dimensional stability of the SITT system for margin design, the shoulder margin and chamfer margin were evaluated. Furthermore, to test the effect of space for wash impression material, 0.5mm space in SITT and zero space in SITT were statistically compared. Results : 1. There was no significant difference between the group with shoulder margin and that with chamfer margin. 2. There was no significant difference between the group with 0.5mm space and that with zero space for wash impression material. Conclusions : Considering the limitations of this study, the dimensional stability of the SITT system did not interfere with the margin design. Space for the wash impression material was also unnecessary.

Keywords

References

  1. Darby H and Darby LH. Copper-band gingival retraction to produce void-free crown and bridge impressions. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1973; 29:513-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(73)90029-2
  2. Fitzig S, Feder D, Marshak B, Orstein M. An improved copper band impression technique. Quintessence Int. 1985;16:851-3.
  3. LaForgia A. Cordless tissue retraction for impressions for fixed prosthesis. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1967;17:379-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(67)90009-1
  4. Livaditis GJ. Matrix impression system for fixed prosthodontics. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1998;79:208-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70217-3
  5. Modica R and Mainoldi G. Secondary softening of modeling compound for copper band impressions. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1983; 49:361-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90278-0
  6. Goldfogel MH, Bomberg TJ, Bomberg SE. Tube impressions: an alternative technique for taking difficult crown and bridge impressions with minimal gingival trauma. Quintessence Int. 1989;20:555-60.
  7. Lee JY, Lim JH, Cho IH. Study on the accuracy and dimensional stability of impression body according to the techniques and directions of impression taking. J. Korean Acad. Prosthodont. 1999;37:567-80.
  8. Scott GK, Hawkins L, Chetwyn J, Doughty T. Check bite impressions using irreversible alginate/reversible hydrocolloid combinations. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1997;77:83-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70211-7
  9. Komiyama O, Saeiki H, Kawara M, Kobayahi K, Otake S. Effect of relief space and escape holes on the pressure characteristics of maxillary edentulous impressions. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2004;91:570-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.03.020
  10. Bergmans L, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Wevers M, Lambrechts P. Methodology for the quantitative evaluation of root canal instrumentation using microcomputed tomography. Int. Endod. J. 2001;34:309-8.
  11. Hunter AJ and Hunter AR. Gingival margins for crowns: review and discussions; part II: discrepancies and configurations. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1990;64:636-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90286-L
  12. Donovan T and Prince J. An analysis of margin configurations for metal-ceramic crowns. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1985;53:153-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90097-6
  13. Williams PT, JacksonDG,BergmanW. An evaluation of the timedependent dimensional stability of eleven elastomeric impression materials. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1984;52:120-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(84)90194-X
  14. Appleby DC, Pameijer CH, Boffa J. Combined reversible hydrocolloid/irreversible hydrocolloid impression system. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1980; 44:27-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(80)90042-6
  15. Heisler WH and Tjan AH. Accuracy and bond strength of reversible with irreversible hydrocolloid impression systems: a comparative study. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1992; 68:578-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90369-L
  16. Lepe X, Sandrik JL, Land MF. Bond strength and accuracy of combined reversible-irreversible hydrocolloid impression systems. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1992; 67:621-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90159-8
  17. Thongthammachat S, Moore MK, BarcoMT, HovijitraS, BrownDT, AndresCJ. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J. Prosthodont. 2002;11:98-108. https://doi.org/10.1053/jopr.2002.125192
  18. Johnson GH and Craig RG. Accuracy of four types of rubber impression materials compared with the time of pouring and repeat pouring of models. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1985; 53:484-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90630-4