• Users Online: 1118
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL STUDY COMPETITION
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 27-28

OSC45: Comparative evaluation of physical properties of nanoparticle incorporated addition silicone with other elastomeric impression materials


Date of Web Publication31-Oct-2018

Correspondence Address:
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.244637

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
... OSC45: Comparative evaluation of physical properties of nanoparticle incorporated addition silicone with other elastomeric impression materials. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2018;18, Suppl S1:27-8

How to cite this URL:
... OSC45: Comparative evaluation of physical properties of nanoparticle incorporated addition silicone with other elastomeric impression materials. J Indian Prosthodont Soc [serial online] 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 20];18, Suppl S1:27-8. Available from: http://www.j-ips.org/text.asp?2018/18/5/27/244637



S. Padmasree, R. Vaishnavi, R. Sridharan

Chettinad Dental College and Research Institute, Chennai, India.

Aim: To study the changes in physical properties of commercially available nanoparticle incorporated addition silicone and comparing the same with other commercially available addition silicone impression material and polyether. The hypothesis of the study is that the nanoparticle incorporated PVS material has better flow and wettability when compared to other commercially available PVS material and wettability equivalent to polyether elastomeric impression material.

Materials And Methods: Polyether (group A) the most hydrophilic of other elastomers is used as a control material. Other groups include 2 commercially available addition silicone (GROUP B, C) and nanoparticles incorporated addition silicone (GROUP D). The Pre-set and Post-set wettability of each impression material is evaluated using saliva and a slurry of CaSO4 dihydrate respectively. The contact angle made by the saliva or CaSo4 drop with the respective impression material measured and evaluated using drop shape analysis of the frozen digital images. Also each impression material is used to make impression of a standard die. The die is dipped in saliva and impression is made using the above mentioned impression materials. The number of voids in the impression and stone cast poured from the impression are counted and evaluated.

Results: The mean pre-set wettability of group A, B, C, D was 43.0400, 58.7960, 58.3940, 48.4350 and the mean post-set wettability of group A, B, C, D was 36.2870, 60.5320, 59.2110, 40.5640. The mean number of voids on the impression for group A, B, C, D was 0.5,2.1,2.4,1.9 and The mean number of voids on the cast for group A, B, C, D was 0.3,1.2,1.6,0.8.

Conclusion: Poly ether was found to have the best wettability, and the wettability of nanoparticle incorporated PVS was comparable to polyether and was better than other commercially available PVS material. The polyether material exhibited lesser voids. Comparable results were obtained with nanoparticle incorporated PVS and the other two exhibited more voids.






 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed65    
    Printed3    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]