• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.1-14
• /
• 1992

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of reproduction of stone casts made from complete-arch impressions using different trays. The trays used were : 1) nonperforated custom tray, 2) perforated custom tray, 3) nonperforated Rim-Lock tray, 4) perforated stock tray. Impressions were made from an dentulous acrylic resin model with metal inserts in first premolars and second molars. Transverse distance, sagittal distance and diagonal distance were measured using 4 landmarks. Measurements were made by using 3 dimensional measuring machine. The impression material used was an addition silicone. Impressions were poured at once with a Type IV dental stone. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and student t-test with a sample size of five. The results were as follows : 1. There were statistical differences in amount of dimensional change in according to the tray types. In amount of mean dimensional change, perforated custom tray was the first smallest, nonperforated custom tray was the second, nonperforated Rim-Lock tray and perforated stock tray were the largest. 2. There were statistical differences in amount of dimensional change between nonperforated custom tray and nonperforated Rim-Lock tray, and between perforated custom tray perforated stock tray. 3. There were satistical differences in amount of dimensional change between nonperforated custom tray and perforated custom tray, but there was not a statistical difference between nonperforated Rim-Lock tray and perforated stock tray. 4. There was not a statistical difference in amount of dimensional change between upper and lower arch in all tray types.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.287-293
• /
• 2017

PURPOSE. To compare the dimensional accuracy of three impression techniques- a separating foil impression, a custom tray impression, and a stock tray impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A machined mandibular complete-arch metal model with special modifications served as a master cast. Three different impression techniques (n = 6 in each group) were performed with addition-cured silicon materials: i) putty-wash technique with a prefabricated metal tray (MET) using putty and regular body, ii) single-phase impression with custom tray (CUS) using regular body material, and iii) two-stage technique with stock metal tray (SEP) using putty with a separating foil and regular body material. All impressions were poured with epoxy resin. Six different distances (four intra-abutment and two inter-abutment distances) were gauged on the metal master model and on the casts with a microscope in combination with calibrated measuring software. The differences of the evaluated distances between the reference and the three test groups were calculated and expressed as mean (${\pm}SD$). Additionally, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated and significant differences between the experimental groups were assumed when confidence intervals did not overlap. RESULTS. Dimensional changes compared to reference values varied between -74.01 and $32.57{\mu}m$ (MET), -78.86 and 30.84 (CUS), and between -92.20 and 30.98 (SEP). For the intra-abutment distances, no significant differences among the experimental groups were detected. CUS showed a significantly higher dimensional accuracy for the inter-abutment distances with -0.02 and -0.08 percentage deviation compared to MET and SEP. CONCLUSION. The separation foil technique is a simple alternative to the custom tray technique for single tooth restorations, while limitations may exist for extended restorations with multiple abutment teeth.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.282-296
• /
• 2001

The accuracy of master cast reproduction by a polyvinylsiloxane impression material using two visible-light curing resin and autopolymerizing polymethyl methacrylate resin custom tray material was investigated. Custom trays were fabricated from a master cast that had three index points marked on both inner and outer vestibules and then poured in yellow stone. The distance between the reproduced index points were measured to be ${\pm}0.001mm$ with a measuring microscope and the algebraic norms calculated for each tray material. No differences were found in the algebraic norms of inner and outer dimensions for upper tray impressions by ANOVA(p>0.05). However, T-test revealed that there were differences between upper and lower impressions and Tukey's hsd test revealed that in lower tray impressions, the Palatray in inner, the Lightplast in outer dimensions respectively were different from other materials. The index points reproduced on the casts compared with the master cast, were closer together for upper tray impressions. All four tray materials produced acceptable casts, 1. Algebraic norms of inner and outer dimensions of the test casts for upper trays were not statistically different irrespective of materials.(P>0.05) 2. T-test showed that there were differences between means with upper and lower trays especially in outer dimension.(P>0.05) 3. But, algebraic norms of inner and outer dimensions of the test casts for lower trays were statistically different between materials. 4. Palatray XL in inner, Lightplast-platten in outer dimensions respectively for lower trays were different from other materials, but, the nearest to the original model.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.433-445
• /
• 2010

The aim of this study was to evaluate the fixation effect by connecting impression copings and to compare the three types of impression trays which were used in open tray impression technique. Experimental groups used 3 types of impression trays which are custom tray, plastic metal combination tray and polycarbonate stock tray. These three groups were subdivided into splinted and non-splinted impression copings group. The total number of experimental groups was six. 10 specimens were made for each group. We used 1-screw test, observing the specimen on which only one side abutment of reference framework was fixated with 20 Ncm. The gap between implant analogue and abutment of the other side was observed by stereo microscope. It was measured at 6 points in each specimen. Measuring value was selected when same result was revealed 3 times. Recorded data were statistically analyzed. Whether impression copings were splinted or not, there was no significant difference among custom tray group, plastic metal combination tray group, and polycarbonate stock tray group. Significant statistical difference in vertical fit discrepancy was found between splinted and non-splinted impression copings group with custom tray, plastic metal combination tray and polycarbonate stock tray (p<0.05).

• Journal of Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.254-257
• /
• 2011

This study was performed to development a dental three-dimensional laser scanning system and measure the accuracy of new adjustable lower dental impression trays. Multiple impressions of a resin master model were made with custom, stock and new adjustable trays and vinyl polysiloxane impression material. The lower master model and resulting cast were compared using an dental scanning system. Each 3D image was superimposed onto the lower master model image and analyzed with custom software. Multiple measurements of the lower master model and casts were analyzed to determine the accuracy of tray types.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.9.1-9.6
• /
• 2018

The objective of this case report is to introduce a simple technique for simultaneously taking a closed-mouth impression and functionally generated path (FGP) for a full coverage crown restoration. A monolithic zirconia crown was the restoration of choice. An alginate impression of the abutment tooth was taken to fabricate a custom-made closed-mouth impression tray covering the abutment tooth and the adjacent teeth. The tray had an FGP table and an abutment tray in cameo and intaglio surfaces, respectively. The impression was taken with silicone impression material after adjusting the abutment tray and inscribing the FGP using self-curing acrylic resins. Plaster casts were made from the impression, and a zirconia crown was fabricated. The crown was cemented to the abutment tooth with minimal adjustments. This simple technique resulted in a well-fitting crown that accounted for mandibular movements. Using the custom closed-mouth impression tray incorporating an FGP table simultaneously aids in fabricating an accurately fitting restoration that incorporates harmonious mandibular movements using a single impression capture.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.63-67
• /
• 2009

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM. Use of custom tray and tray adhesive is clinically recommended for elastomeric impression material. However there is not clear mention of drying time of tray adhesive in achieving appropriate bonding strength of tray material and impression material. PURPOSE. This study is to investigate an appropriate drying time of tray adhesives by evaluating tensile bonding strength between two types of polyvinylsiloxane impression materials and resin tray, according to various drying time intervals of tray adhesives, and with different manufacturing company combination of impression material and tray adhesive. MATERIAL AND METHODS. Adhesives used in this study were Silfix (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del, USA) and VPS Tray Adhesive (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) and impression materials were Aquasil Ultra (monophase regular set, Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del, USA) and Imprint II Garant (regular body, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany). They were used combinations from the same manufacture and exchanged combinations of the two. The drying time was designed to air dry, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, and 25 minutes. Total 240 of test specimens were prepared by auto-polymerizing tray material(Instant Tray Mix, Lang, Wheeling, Il, USA) with 10 specimens in each group. The specimens were placed in the Universal Testing machine (Instron, model 3366, Instron Corp, University avenue, Nowood, MA, USA) to perform the tensile test (cross head speed 5 mm/min). The statistically efficient drying time was evaluated through ANOVA and Scheffe test. All the tests were performed at 95% confidence level. RESULTS. The results revealed that at least 10 minutes is needed for Silfix-Aquasil, and 15 minutes for VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II, to attain an appropriate tensile bonding strength. VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II had a superior tensile bonding strength when compared to Silfix-Aquasil over 15 minutes. Silfix-Aquasil had a superior bonding strength to VPS Tray Adhesive-Aquasil, and VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II had a superior tensile bonding strength to Silfix-Imprint II at all drying periods. CONCLUSION. Significant increase in tensile bonding strength with Silfix-Aquasil and VPS Tray adhesive-Imprint II combination until 10 and 15 minutes respectively. Tray adhesive-impression material combination from the same company presented higher tensile bonding strength at all drying time intervals than when using tray adhesive-impression material of different manufactures.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.539-549
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of 3 implant impression methods by using strain gauge. The models used for this study were partially edentulous mandibular acrylic resin casts Model A, with two abutment analogs in #46,47 extraction site, represented two implant parallel to to the adjacent natural tooth. Model B represent an anterior implant parallel to the adjacene natural tooth and a posterior implant exhibiting a 15-degree lingual inclination. Master framework were fabricated on the master model, and 3 strain gauges were attached to a master framwork to determine the passivity of fit of the framework to sample casts made by the three impression techniques. The master framework was attached to each sample cast with gold screws, which were tightened with the torque driver to ensure a consistent toque application of 10 Ncm. Universal Digital Measuring System UCAM-5BT was used for strain measuring. Impression techniques studid were : 1. unsplinted tapered impression coping, polyvinyl siloxane, stock tray 2. unsplinted squared impression coping, polyether, custom tray 3. squared impression coping splinted with Duralay resin, polyether, custom tray Through analysis on data from this study, the following conclusions were obtained. 1. There were no statistically significant differences between the mean strain recorded from the sample casts made with the tree impression. But only strain values of model A(parallel group) Y-axis was signifcantly differed between Technique 1 and 3(P<0.05). 2. There was no statistically significant difference between model A(parallel group) and model B(15-degree divergent group).

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.38 no.5
• /
• pp.650-658
• /
• 2000

This study was investigated to compare the bond strength of polysulfide adhesive between tray resin and border molding materials and to evaluate the effect of saliva contamination on them. We made the 135 resin tray secimens with a dimension of $1{\times}1{\times}1cm$ and divided them into 3 groups by the materials 1) Quicky group, 2) Compound group, and 3) Impregum group Each group was subdivided by saliva contimination. Group S1 : applied adhesive without saliva contamination Group S2 : applied adhesive after drying 15seconds after saliva contamination Group S3 : applied adhesive no after saliva contamination. Tensile tests were performed with a Universal Load testing machine. Results showed Impregum group significantly higher bond strength than Quicky group, but there was no significant difference in adhesive bond strength between Compound group and Quicky group in experimental group by materials In experimental group by saliva contamination, S1 group is significantly higher bond strength than S2 group and S2 group is significantly higher bond strength than S3 group in Quicky group and S1, S2 group is significantly higher bond strength than S3 group in Compound group and Impregum group. Impression compound and Impregum F which are usually used as an individual tray border mold-ing material can be said to be satisfied in adhesive bond strength to polysulfide impression materials. After try-in and clinical adjustment are performed, a custom tray should be properly rinsed and air dried before tray adhesive was placed.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.290-298
• /
• 1996

The effects of impression tray disinfection procedures on the bond strength of impression-material adhesive to two of types resin trays were evaluated with a tensile test. Autopolyme-rizing acrylic resin was formed into 1x1x1 cm cubes. A hook was attached to each cube with autopolymerizing acrylic resin. Perforated trays were fabricated with stops to maintain an even 3 cm of impression material over the resin block. Hook on the opposite side of the perforated tray permitted attachment of the metal plate to a mechanical testing machine. Before adhesive was applied, one third of the resin specimens were immersed in a 5% sodium hypochlorite solution : one third in a 2% glutaradehyde solution, and one third were kept in the "as fabricated" condition. Three products(Perfect ups, Exafine, and Exp-ress) of polyvynil siloxane impression material-adhesive system were evaluated. The resin-impression material-metal plate couples were attached to a mechanical testing machine and tensile forces were applied at a separation rate of 10 centimeters per second. The results were as follows; 1. Both disinfectant and adhesive had effects on bond strength values, but adhesive had more effect than disinfectant(p<0.01). However, there was no interaction between dinin-fectant and adhesive(p>0.01). 2. Mean bond strength values for the Perfect materials were about 85% less than that of the Exafine or the Express materials. However, there was no stastically significant difference between the mean bond strength values of the Exafine materials and the Express materials(p>0.05). 3. The use of disinfectants produced significant reduction in bond strength values(p<0.05). But there was no stastically significant difference between the mean bond strength values of the groups treated with disinfectants(p>0.05).