Journals / Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3

Effect of storage time on tear strength of extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials

Effect of Storage Time on Tear Strength of Extended-Pour Irreversible Hydrocolloid Impression Materials

Pages
26–30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

All commercial extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials tested maintained their tear strengths after 120 hours of storage.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of prolonged storage times on the tear strength of extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Eighty four specimens were fabricated from five commercial extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials (BluePrint Xcreme, Hydrogum 5, Kromopan, Alginmax and Alginelle) as well as one experimental formula in accordance with the ISO 21563:2013 standard effective for irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All commercial extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials tested maintained their tear strengths after 120 hours of storage.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Tear Strength · Irreversible Hydrocolloid · Impression Material

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of prolonged storage times on the tear strength of extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials. Material and Method: Eighty four specimens were fabricated from five commercial extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials (BluePrint Xcreme, Hydrogum 5, Kromopan, Alginmax and Alginelle) as well as one experimental formula in accordance with the ISO 21563:2013 standard effective for irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials. Specimens were randomly divided in two groups for each impression material (n=7) and subjected to tear strength test immediately (base line) or after 120 hours of storage. Tear strength values were obtained in N/mm and data were analysed with two-way ANOVA (irreversible hydrocolloid brand, storage time). Multiple comparisons were performed with Tukey’s test (p=0.05). Results: The tear strength of the extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials were affected by brand (p<0.0001) and brand-storage time interaction (p=0.005). Storage time did not influence the tear strengths of the extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials tested except Alginmax whose mean tear strengths increased after 120 hours of storage (p<0.05). At base line measurements Blueprint Xcreme provided the highest mean tear strength values (1.08±0.19 N/mm) whereas Alginelle provided the lowest mean tear strength values (0.51±0.3 N/mm). Hydrogum 5 provided the highest tear strength values after 120 hours of storage (1.15± 0.12 N/mm) whereas Alginelle provided the lowest mean tear strength values (0.55±0.04 N/mm). Conclusion. All commercial extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials tested maintained their tear strengths after 120 hours of storage.

Özet

Amaç: Bu in-vitro çalışmanın amacı; uzatılmış saklama sürelerinin, uzatılmış model elde etme süresine sahip irreversible hidrokolloid ölçü malzemelerinin yırtılma dayanımı üzerine etkisini incelemektir. Materyal-Metod: Beş ticari (BluePrint Xcreme, Hydrogum 5, Kromopan, Alginmax ve Alginelle) ve bir özel formüle edilmiş uzatılmış model etme süresine sahip irreversible hidrokolloid ölçü malzemesi kullanılarak ISO 21563:2013 standartlarına uyumlu seksen dört adet numune hazırlanmıştır. Her bir ölçü malzemesine sait numuneler rastgele iki gruba ayrılmış (n=7) ve hemen veya 120 saatlik saklama süresi sonunda yırtılma testine tabi tutulmuşlardır. Yırtılma dayanımı değerleri N/mm cinsinden ifade edilmiş ve veriler iki yönlü varyans analizi testi (irreversible hidrokolloid markası, saklama süresi) kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çoklu karşılaştırmalara, Tukey testi kullanılarak yapılmıştır (p=0.05). Bulgular: Uzatılmış model etme süresine sahip irreversible hidrokolloid ölçü malzemelerinin yırtılma dayanımları, irreversible hidrokolloid markası parametresi (p<0.0001) ve irreversible hidrokolloid markası-saklama süresi etkileşimi tarafından etkilenmiştir (p=0.005). tarafından etkilenmiştir Saklama süresi, uzatılmış model etme süresine sahip irreversible hidrokolloid ölçü malzemelerinin yırtılma dayanımlarını, 120 saat saklama süresi sonunda yırtılma dayanımı artan Alginmax ölçü malzemesi haricinde etkilememiştir (p<0.05). Hemen yapılan yırtılma dayanımı testinde Blueprint Xcreme en yüksek ortalama yırtılma dayanımı değerlerine sahipken (1.08±0.19 N/mm) Alginelle en düşük ortalama yırtılma dayanımı değerlerini göstermiştir (0.51±0.3 N/mm). 120 saat saklama süresi sonunda Hydrogum 5 en yüksek ortalama yırtılma dayanımı değerlerine sahipken (1.15± 0.12 N/mm) Alginelle en düşük ortalama yırtılma dayanımı değerlerini göstermiştir (0.55±0.04 N/mm). Sonuç: Test edilen uzatılmış model elde etme süresine sahip ticari irreversible hidrokolloid ölçü malzemelerinin tümü, yırtılma dayanımlarını 120 saatlik saklama süresi sonunda korumuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞAHİN, V., JODATİ, H., EVİS, Z. (2018). Effect of storage time on tear strength of extended-pour irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3, 26–30. https://ajindex.com/articles/363325

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Anusavice K, Shen, C, Rawls HR. Phillips’ science of dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis: Saunders Elsevier; 2013. p. 151
  2. Nandini VV, Venkatesh KV, Nair KC. Alginate impressions: a practical perspective. J Conserv Dent 2008; 11: 37-41
  3. Phoenix RD, Rodney D. Stewart’s clinical removable partial prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Hanover: Quintessence; 2002. p. 1627
  4. Kaur G, Jain P, Uppal M, Sikka R. Alginate impression materials: from then till now. Heal Talk J Clin Dent 2012; 5:38-9
  5. Craig RG, Robert G. Restorative dental materials. 11th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002. p. 12
  6. Lee EA. Impression material selection in contemporary fixed prosthodontics: technique, rationale, and indications. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005; 26: 780-9
  7. Ciapetti G, Granchi D, Stea S, et al. Cytotoxicity testing of materials with limited in vivo exposure is affected by the duration of cell-material contact. J Biomed Mater Res 1998; 42: 485–90
  8. Vrijhoef MMA, Battistuzzi, PG. Tear energy of impression materials. J Dent 1986; 175-7
  9. Lawson NC, Burgess JO, Litaker M. Tear strength of five elastomeric impression materials at two setting times and two tearing rates. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008; 20: 186-94
  10. Marshak BL, Cardash HS, Ben-Ur Z. Incidence of impression material found in the gingival sulcus after impression procedure for fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1987; 57: 306-8
  11. Donovan JE, Chee WW. A review of contemporary impression materials and techniques. Dent Clin North Am 2004; 48: 445-70
  12. Miller MW. Syneresis in alginate impression materials. Br Dent J 1975; 139: 425-30
  13. Jamani KD. The effect of pouring time and storage condition on the accuracy of irreversible hydrocolloid impressions. Saudi Dent J 2002; 14: 126-30
  14. Walker MP, Burckhard J, Mitts DA, Williams KB. Dimensional change over time of extended-storage alginate impression materials. Angle Orthod 2010; 80: 1110-5
  15. Chai J, Takahashi Y, Lautenschlager E. P. Clinically relevant mechanical properties of elastomeric impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 1998; 11: 219–23
  16. Lu H, Nguyen B, Powers J. Mechanical properties of 3 hydrophilic addition silicone and polyether elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 151–54
  17. Webber RL, Ryge G. The determination of tear energy of extensible materials of dental interest. J. Biomed Mater Res 1968; 2: 281–96
  18. Huynh L, Xie DX, Shellard E. Mechanical properties of polysulfide impression materials. J Dent Res 2002; 81