Aim. Tooth preparation for indirect bonded restorations usually generates significant dentin exposure. Delayed vs immediate application of bonding agents (IDS) respectively does not provide optimal conditions for long lasting performance of restorations. Aim of this study is to evaluate the behavior of two impression materials (silicone and polyether) over IDS tooth surface combined to different treatments. Methods. 18 extracted teeth were used. After removal of occlusal half of the crown, the specimens were treated with Optibond FL (Kerr), and assessed following 1 of 3 treatments: air blocking (group 1) (n=6); air blocking+ prophy Z paste (group 2) (n=6); air blocking+ prophy Z paste+ Marsiglia soap solution (group 3) (n=6). Each group received either impression materials at the same time. The specimens were analyzed under SEM and measured. Results. The areas of silicone and polyether linked on the surface in the group 1 were respectively 38,000±9,242 mm2 and 39,700±10,336 mm2 (n=3), while in the group 2 were respectively 0,267±0,252 mm2 and 0,467±0,252 mm2 (n=3), and finally in the group 3 were 0,00 mm2 (n=3) for both. Statistical evauations showed that there were significantly differences (P<.05) between group 1 and group 3. Conclusions. the application of prophy Z paste and Marsiglia soap represents the best way to overcome the interaction between impression materials and IDS tooth surface.
IDS and surface treatment before final impression: a clinical protocol
MURMURA, Giovanna;VARVARA, GIUSEPPE;TRAINI, TONINO
2011-01-01
Abstract
Aim. Tooth preparation for indirect bonded restorations usually generates significant dentin exposure. Delayed vs immediate application of bonding agents (IDS) respectively does not provide optimal conditions for long lasting performance of restorations. Aim of this study is to evaluate the behavior of two impression materials (silicone and polyether) over IDS tooth surface combined to different treatments. Methods. 18 extracted teeth were used. After removal of occlusal half of the crown, the specimens were treated with Optibond FL (Kerr), and assessed following 1 of 3 treatments: air blocking (group 1) (n=6); air blocking+ prophy Z paste (group 2) (n=6); air blocking+ prophy Z paste+ Marsiglia soap solution (group 3) (n=6). Each group received either impression materials at the same time. The specimens were analyzed under SEM and measured. Results. The areas of silicone and polyether linked on the surface in the group 1 were respectively 38,000±9,242 mm2 and 39,700±10,336 mm2 (n=3), while in the group 2 were respectively 0,267±0,252 mm2 and 0,467±0,252 mm2 (n=3), and finally in the group 3 were 0,00 mm2 (n=3) for both. Statistical evauations showed that there were significantly differences (P<.05) between group 1 and group 3. Conclusions. the application of prophy Z paste and Marsiglia soap represents the best way to overcome the interaction between impression materials and IDS tooth surface.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
