• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.569-583
• /
• 1995

Disinfection of dental impressions are necessary due to contamination with patient’s saliva and blood, which is a potential for cross-infection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of disinfection of four hydrophilic rubber impression materials with three disinfecting solutions, on the dimensional stability and surface hardness of improved stone casts. Three hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials(Express, Reprosil, Exafine) and one polyether impression material(Impregum-F) were mixed according to the manufacturer’s directions and impressions were made on a ADA specification No. 19 stainless-steeldie. On removal of the impressions, each impression was immersed in one of the disinfectants(Banicide, Potadine, Clorox) for 10 minutes. After disinfection, type IV improved stone. casts were poured. On this cast, the linear dimension and surface hardness were measuredusing a Measurescope(Nikon, Japan) and a Barcol hardness tester(Barber, Colman Co U. S. A). The results were as follows : 1. The improved stone casts from disinfected Reprosil and Impregum-F impression material did not show dimensional changes(P>0.01). Those from disinfected Express and Exafine impression material showed dimensional changes(P<0.01). The amount of shrinkage was not clinically significant. 2. The improved stone casts from disinfected Express impression material did not exhibit changes in surface hardness(P>0.01), but those from disinfected Reprosil, Exafine, Imp regnum-F impression material showed changes in surface hardness(P<0.01). 3. The dimensinal stability and surface hardness of the improved stone casts were satisfactory using Banicide on Express, all disinfectants used in this study on Reprosil, Potadin and Clorox on Exafine, Banicide and Clorox on Impregum-F. According to these results, immersion disinfection of hydrophilic rubber impression mate rials did not adversely affect the resultant casts. Nevertheless compatibility tests of impression materials and disinfectants should be done when disinfecting impressions.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.11 no.5
• /
• pp.271-279
• /
• 2019

PURPOSE. The newest technologies for digital implant impression (DII) taking are developing rapidly and showing acceptable clinical results. However, scientific literature is lacking data from clinical studies about the accuracy of DII. The aim of this study was to compare digital and conventional dental implant impressions (CII) in a clinical environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty-four fixed zirconia restorations supported by 2 implants were fabricated using conventional open-tray impression technique with splinted transfers (CII group) and scan with Trios 3 IOS (3Shape) (DII group). After multiple verification procedures, master models were scanned using laboratory scanner D800 (3Shape). 3D models from conventional and digital workflow were imported to reverse engineering software and superimposed with high resolution 3D CAD models of scan bodies. Distance between center points, angulation, rotation, vertical shift, and surface mismatch of the scan bodies were measured and compared between conventional and digital impressions. RESULTS. Statistically significant differences were found for: a) inter-implant distance, b) rotation, c) vertical shift, and d) surface mismatch differences, comparing DII and CII groups for mesial and distal implant scan bodies ($P{\leq}.05$). CONCLUSION. Recorded linear differences between digital and conventional impressions were of limited clinical significance with two implant-supported restorations.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.22-29
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical application of digitized silicone rubber impressions by comparing the accuracy of zirconia 3-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated from 2 types of data (working model and impression) obtained from a laser scanner. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ten working models and impressions were prepared with epoxy resin and vinyl polysiloxane, respectively. Based on the data obtained from the laser scanner (D-700; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark), a total of 20 zirconia frameworks were prepared using a dental CAD/CAM system (DentalDesigner; 3shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark / Ener-mill, Dentaim, Seoul, Korea). The silicone replicas were sectioned into four pieces to evaluate the framework fit. The replicas were imaged using a digital microscope, and the fit of the reference points (P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, and P7) were measured using the program in the device. Measured discrepancies were divided into 5 categories of gaps (MG, CG, AWG, AOTG, OG). Data were analyzed with Student's t-test ($\alpha$=0.05), repeated measures ANOVA and two-way ANOVA (${\alpha}=0.05$). RESULTS. The mean gap of the zirconia framework prepared from the working models presented a narrower discrepancy than the frameworks fabricated from the impression bodies. The mean of the total gap in premolars (P=.003) and molars (P=.002) exhibited a statistical difference between two groups. CONCLUSION. The mean gap dimensions of each category showed statistically significant difference. Nonetheless, the digitized impression bodies obtained with a laser scanner were applicable to clinical settings, considering the clinically acceptable marginal fit ($120{\mu}m$).

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.270-279
• /
• 2018

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the patients' perception, acceptance, and preference of the difference between a conventional impression and digital impression through questionnaire survey. Materials and Methods: Thirteen (6 male, 7 female) subjects who experienced both digital and conventional impression at the same day were enrolled in this study. Conventional impression were taken with polyvinylsiloxane and digital impression were performed using a newly developed intra-oral scanner. Immediately after the two impressions were made, a survey was conducted with the standardized questionnaires consisting of the following three categories; 1) general dental treatment 2) satisfaction of conventional impression 3) satisfaction of digital impression. The perceived source of satisfaction was evaluated using Likert scale. The distribution of the answers was assessed by percentages and statistical analyses were performed with the paired t-test, and P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: There were significant differences of the overall satisfaction between two impression methods (P < 0.05). Digital impression showed high satisfaction in less shortness of breath and odor to participants compared to conventional impression. The use of an oral scanner resulted in a discomfort of TMJ due to prolonged mouth opening and in lower score of the scanner tip size. Conclusion: It was confirmed that the preference for the digital impression using intraoral scanner is higher than the conventional impression. Most survey participants said they would recommend the digital impression to others and said they preferred it for future prosthetic treatment.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.207-218
• /
• 1993

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reproducing accuracy of stone casts made from complete arch impressions using different impression materials. The impression materials studied were 1) polyether, 2) polysulfide, 3) polyvinyl siloxane, and 4) irreversible hydrocolloid. Impressions were made from a partially edentulous acrylic resin model with metal inserts in canine, first molar region bilaterally and mid palatal vault region. Each distance between 2 out of 5 meauring points was measured by using 3dimensional measuring machine. Impressions were poured at once with a type IV dental stone. Data were analyzed using t-test with a sample size of six. The results were as follow : 1. Polysulfide and polyether were significantly superior to polyvinyl siloxane and irreversible hydrocolloid in reproducing full arch model(p<0.05), but there were no statistical differences in amount of dimensional reproducing accuracy for full arch impression between polysulfide and polyether(p>0.05). 2. There were statistical differences in amount of dimensional reproducing accuracy between edentulous area and tooth bound area for polysulfide and polyether(p<0.05). but no statistical differences were observed for polyvinyl siloxane and irreversible hydrocolloid(p>0.05).

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.57-65
• /
• 2024

PURPOSE. The aim of this stuldy was to compare the clinical marginal fit of CAD-CAM inlays obtained from intraoral digital impression or addition silicone impression techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study included 31 inlays for prosthodontics purposes of 31 patients: 15 based on intraoral digital impressions (DI group); and 16 based on a conventional impression technique (CI group). Inlays included occlusal and a non-occlusal surface. Inlays were milled in ceramic. The inlay-teeth interface was replicated by placing each inlay in its corresponding uncemented clinical preparation and taking interface impressions with silicone material from occlusal and free surfaces. Interface analysis was made using white light confocal microscopy (WLCM) (scanning area: 694 × 510 ㎛²) from the impression samples. The gap size and the inlay overextension were measured from the microscopy topographies. For analytical purposes (i.e., 95-%-confidence intervals calculations and P-value calculations), the procedure REGRESS in SUDAAN was used to account for clustering (i.e., multiple measurements). For p-value calculation, the log transformation of the dependent variables was used to normalize the distributions. RESULTS. Marginal fit values for occlusal and free surfaces were affected by the type of impression. There were no differences between surfaces (occlusal vs. free). Gap obtained for DI group was 164 ± 84 ㎛ and that for CI group was 209 ± 104 ㎛, and there were statistical differences between them (p = .041). Mean overextension values were 60 ± 59 ㎛ for DI group and 67 ± 73 ㎛ for CI group, and there were no differences between then (p = .553). CONCLUSION. Digital impression achieved inlays with higher clinical marginal fit and performed better than the conventional silicone materials.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.140-155
• /
• 2002

Void-free impression taking is important for the fabrication of accurate dental restorations. One of the essential properties of an impression material used for indirect fabrication of precision castings is the reproduction of the fine detail. The objective in this study was to determine the influence of mixing methods on the number of voids and surface detail reproduction. The number of voids and surface detail reproduction were evaluated with the steteomicroscope $SZ-PT^{(R)}$ and photographed. The results were as follows ; 1. In comparison of the void formation according to mixing methods of all impression materials, mechanical mixing was better than hand mixing and there was significant difference(p<0.05) 2. In comparison of the void formation according to hand mixing of alginate impression materials($TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;CAVEX\;IMPRESSIONAL^{(R)},\;AROMA \;FINE\;DF\;III^{(R)}$), there was no significant difference among alginate groups. But the number of void was increased in the order of $Panasil^{(R)}\;contact,\;TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;Permlastic^{(R)}$ light bodied and there was significant difference (p<0.05). 3. In comparison of the void formation according to mechanical mixing of alginate impression materials($TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;CAVEX\;IMPRESSIONAL^{(R)},\;AROMA FINE\;DF\;III^{(R)}$), there was no significant different among alginate groups. But the number of void was decreased in order of $TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;Permlastic^{(R)}light\;bodied,\;Panasil^{(R)}$ contact and there was significant difference (p<0.05). 4. In comparison of the surface detail reproduction according to mixing methods of 3 types of impression materials($TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;Permlastic^{(R)}\;light\;bodied,\;Panasil^{(R)}\;contact$), there was no significant difference between hand mixing and mechanical mixing method 5. The surface detail reproduction was only influenced by impression materials, and produced better in order of $TOKUSO\;A-1{\alpha}^{(R)},\;Panasil^{(R)}\;contact,\;Permlastic^{(R)}$ light bodied. There was significat difference among 3 type of impression materials(p<0.05). From the above results, void formation is influenced by mixing methods and surface detail reproduction is influenced by impression materials than mixing methods. Therefore, to fabricate accurate restorations, proper impression material and mechanical mixing method are more effective and available clinically.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.239-248
• /
• 2007

The accuracy and dimensional stability of rubber impression materials are very important for the fitness of the final restoration. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the effects of the storage time and pouring frequency of the additional silicone materials on dimensional stability. Total 30 impressions were made of tooth prepared single crown. The dies had 1 buccolingual, 1 mesiodistal and 1 occlusogingival lines. Two additional silicone materials(examixfine, aquasil) were included. 15 specimens were made of each impression material and poured by type IV stone over times(1hour, 24hours, 72hours) after mixing. 5 impressions poured after 1 hour were used for second pouring after 24hours and third pouring after 72hours. The same examiner measured each specimen 3 times after lazer scanning. All statistical tests were performed with the level of significance set at 0.05. The results indicated that significant difference at any measuring point of stone dies except the buccolingual and mesiodistal lines of the specimen made at 1hour after mixing with examixfine when measurements at 1hour, 24hours and 72hours were campared. There were significant difference between two impression materials and at every measuring point of stone dies made at second and third pouring. The length of measuring point increased significantly as time passed by and increase of the pouring frequency. However, this results are clinically acceptable except the dies of the third pouring. Under the conditions of this study, the shrinkage rate of the additional silicone rubber impression materials significantly increased as time passed by and increase of the pouring frequency.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. The accuracy of a gypsum model (GM), which was taken using a conventional silicone impression technique, was compared with that of a polyurethane model (PM), which was taken using an iTero$^{TM}$ digital impression system. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The maxillary first molar artificial tooth was selected as the reference tooth. The GMs were fabricated through a silicone impression of a reference tooth, and PMs were fabricated by a digital impression (n=9, in each group). The reference tooth and experimental models were scanned using a 3 shape convince$^{TM}$ scan system. Each GM and PM image was superimposed on the registered reference model (RM) and 2D images were obtained. The discrepancies of the points registered on the superimposed images were measured and defined as GM-RM group and PM-RM group. Statistical analysis was performed using a Student's T-test (${\alpha}=0.05$). RESULTS. A comparison of the absolute value of the discrepancy revealed a significant difference between the two groups only at the occlusal surface. The GM group showed a smaller mean discrepancy than the PM group. Significant differences in the GM-RM group and PM-RM group were observed in the margins (point a and f), mesial mid-axial wall (point b) and occlusal surfaces (point c and d). CONCLUSION. Under the conditions examined, the digitally fabricated polyurethane model showed a tendency for a reduced size in the margin than the reference tooth. The conventional gypsum model showed a smaller discrepancy on the occlusal surface than the polyurethane model.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.249-259
• /
• 1989

Dental impression materials often become contaminated with patients' saliva and blood which creates the potential for cross-infection. It was the purpose of this study to investigate the effects of disinfection of three different rubber impression materials with four different disinfecting solutions. Polysulfide, vinyl polysiloxane and polyether impression materials were mixed according to the manufacturer's directions and samples were formed on a stainless steel model. On removal from the standard model, impressions were immersed in a disinfectant (acid-potentiated glutaraldehyde, phenollic compound, chlorine compound, iodophor) at room tempera tures for ten minutes. After disinfection, the distance between reference points(linear dimension) was measured using the non-contact automatic cordinate measuring projector(MZ-1, Nikon). Through statistical analyses on the data from this study,. the following conclusions were obtained. 1. Polysulfide, vinyl polysiloxane impressions were disinfected without dimensional change.(p>0.05) 2. Polyether impressions which were immersed in acid-potentiated glutaraldehyde were statistically different from control group.(p<0.05) But the amount of shrinkage(0.04%) would not be clinically significant. 3. By immersion of polysulfide, vinyl polysiloxane, polyether impressions in Banicide, Biocide, Multicide plus, sodium hypochlorite for ten minutes, clinically accurate impressions were obtained without dimensional change.