2000Journal of ProsthodonticsRequires access

An in vitro comparison of 5 techniques for impressing dowel space preparations

Winston W. L. Chee, George C. Cho, Riccardo Marzola

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: This in vitro study compared 5 different dowel space impression techniques using polyvinyl siloxane impression material to determine which method produced fewer voids in the dowel space impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five techniques were used to make impressions of a prepared dowel space in a simulated endodontically treated tooth. Technique I used a 25-gauge anesthetic needle to act as a vent at the apex of the preparation to reduce voids produced during the expression of light body impression material. The anesthetic needle was removed after the impression material was injected, and an impression post was then inserted to the depth of the preparation. Twenty impressions made using this technique were compared with other techniques that used the vent without a post, no vent with a post, no vent without a post, and a lentulo spiral with a post (Techniques II through V, respectively). The percentage of impressions with voids from each group was compared to determine which technique consistently produced a void-free impression of the complete preparation length. If voids were observed in the impression, the specimen was considered inadequate. RESULTS: The percents of void-free impressions using Techniques I through V were 100%, 70%, 40%, 60%, and 20%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using a 25-gauge needle as a vent while expressing impression material into the dowel space followed by placing the impression post consistently produced void-free dowel space impressions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: This in vitro study compared 5 different dowel space impression techniques using polyvinyl siloxane impression material to determine which method produced fewer voids in the dowel space impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five techniques were used to make impressions of a prepared dowel space in a simulated endodontically treated tooth. Technique I used a 25-gauge anesthetic needle to act as a vent at the apex of the preparation to reduce voids produced during the expression of light body impression material. The anesthetic needle was removed after the impression material was injected, and an impression post was then inserted to the depth of the preparation. Twenty impressions made using this technique were compared with other techniques that used the vent without a post, no vent with a post, no vent without a post, and a lentulo spiral with a post (Techniques II through V, respectively). The percentage of impressions with voids from each group was compared to determine which technique consistently produced a void-free impression of the complete preparation length. If voids were observed in the impression, the specimen was considered inadequate. RESULTS: The percents of void-free impressions using Techniques I through V were 100%, 70%, 40%, 60%, and 20%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using a 25-gauge needle as a vent while expressing impression material into the dowel space followed by placing the impression post consistently produced void-free dowel space impressions.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: This in vitro study compared 5 different dowel space impression techniques using polyvinyl siloxane impression material to determine which method produced fewer voids in the dowel space impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five techniques were used to make impressions of a prepared dowel space in a simulated endodontically treated tooth. Technique I used a 25-gauge anesthetic needle to act as a vent at the apex of the preparation to reduce voids produced during the expression of light body impression material. The anesthetic needle was removed after the impression material was injected, and an impression post was then inserted to the depth of the preparation. Twenty impressions made using this technique were compared with other techniques that used the vent without a post, no vent with a post, no vent without a post, and a lentulo spiral with a post (Techniques II through V, respectively). The percentage of impressions with voids from each group was compared to determine which technique consistently produced a void-free impression of the complete preparation length. If voids were observed in the impression, the specimen was considered inadequate. RESULTS: The percents of void-free impressions using Techniques I through V were 100%, 70%, 40%, 60%, and 20%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using a 25-gauge needle as a vent while expressing impression material into the dowel space followed by placing the impression post consistently produced void-free dowel space impressions.

Key concepts: Dowel, Impression, Materials science, Void (composites), Composite material, Dentistry, Orthodontics, Computer science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
An in vitro comparison of 5 techniques for impressing dowel space preparations — Research Paper | ScholarLens