Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Effect of the Impression Margin Thickness on the Linear Accuracy of Impression and Stone Dies: An In Vitro Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society

Abstract

The space available for impression material in gingival sulcus immediately after the removal of retraction cord has been found to be 0.3–0.4 mm. However after 40 s only 0.2 mm of the retracted space is available. This is of concern when impression of multiple abutments is to be made. Hence a study was planned to determine the minimum width of the retracted sulcus necessary to obtain a good impression. Five metal dies were machined to accurately fit a stainless steel block with a square cavity in the center with spaces, 1 mm deep and of varying widths (0.11–0.3 mm) away from the block. Polyvinyl siloxane impressions were made and poured using a high strength stone. Using traveling microscope, length and widths of abutment, impression and die were measured and compared for linear accuracy and completeness of impression. Results showed 1.5–3 times greater mean distortion and larger coefficient of variance in the 0.11 mm group than in the wider sulcular groups. ANOVA test for distortion also showed statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). 75 % of impressions in 0.11 mm group were defective compared to less than 25 % of impressions in other width groups. It is not always possible to predictably obtain accurate impressions in sulcus width of 0.11 mm or lesser. Dimensionally accurate and defect free impressions were obtained in sulcus width of 0.15 mm and wider. Hence clinicians must choose retraction methods to obtain a width greater than 0.35 mm. Further immediate loading of the impression material after cord removal may improve accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Graph 1
Graph 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baharav H, Laufer BZ, Langer Y, Cardash HS (1997) The effect of displacement time on gingival crevice width. Int J Prosthodont 10:248–253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shillingburg jr,Hobo S,Whitsett LD,Jacobi R, Brackett SE (1997) Fluid control and soft tissue management. In: Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics, 3rd edn. Quintessence, Chicago, pp 257–279

  3. Laufer BZ, Baharav H, Cardash HS (1994) The linear accuracy of impressions and stone dies as affected by the thickness of the impression margin. Int J Prosthodont 7:247–252

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Laufer BZ, Baharav H, Langer Y, Cardash HS (1997) The closure of the gingival crevice following gingival retraction for impression making. J Oral Rehabil 24:629–635

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Millar B (2001) How to make a good impression (crown and bridge). Br Dent J 191:402–405

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Craig RG (1989) Restorative dental materials, 8th edn. Mosby, St Louis, pp 293–342

    Google Scholar 

  7. Harrison JD (1979) Prevention of failures in making impressions and dies. Dent Clin North Am 23:13–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hung SH, Purk JH, Tira DE, Eick JD (1992) Accuracy of one step versus two step putty wash addition silicon impression technique. J Prosthet Dent 67:583–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Laufer BZ, Baharav H, Ganor Y, Cardash HS (1996) The effect of marginal thickness on the distortion of different impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 76:466–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baharav H, Kupershmidt I, Laufer BZ, Cardash HS (2004) The effect of sulcular width on the linear accuracy of impression material in the presence of an undercut. Int J Prosthodont 17:585–589

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schierano G, Bassi F, Bresciano ME, Carossa S (2000) Comparison of marginal fit of 3 different metal-ceramic systems: An in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont 13:405–408

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Besimo C, Jeger C, Guggenheim R (1997) Marginal adaptation of titanium frameworks produced by CAD/CAM techniques. Int J Prosthodont 10:541–546

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Spiekermann H, Anusavice KJ (2001) Marginal fit of alumina and zirconia based fixed partial dentures produced by a CAD/CAM system. Oper Dent 26:367–374

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Council on Dental Materials and Devices (1977) Revised American dental association specification no. 19 for non-aqueous elastomeric dental impression material. J Am Dent Assoc 94:733–741

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hondrum SO (1994) Tear and energy properties of three impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 7:517–521

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hansson O, Eklund J (1988) Impression for prosthodontic restorations reproducing narrow spaces and severe undercuts. Acta Odontol Scand 46:199–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lacy AM, Fukui H, Bellman T, Jendresen MD (1981) Time-dependent accuracy of elastomeric impression materials. Part II: polyether, polysulfides, and polyvinyl siloxane. J Prosthet Dent 45:329–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pratten DH, Novetsky M (1991) Detail reproduction of soft-tissue—a comparison of impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 65:188–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Aimjirakul P, Masuda T, Takahashi H, Miura H (2003) Gingival sulcus simulation model for evaluating the penetration characteristics of elastomeric impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 16:385–389

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Marshak BL, Cardash HS, Ben-ur Z (1987) Incidence of impression material found in the gingival sulcus after impression procedure for fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 57:306–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y. G. Naveen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Naveen, Y.G., Patil, R. Effect of the Impression Margin Thickness on the Linear Accuracy of Impression and Stone Dies: An In Vitro Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 13, 13–18 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-012-0160-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-012-0160-7

Keywords

Navigation