Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fonseca,Rodrigo Borges
Data de Publicação: 2010
Outros Autores: Branco,Carolina Assaf, Haiter-Neto,Francisco, Gonçalves,Luciano de Souza, Soares,Carlos José, Carlo,Hugo Lemes, Sinhoreti,Mário Alexandre Coelho, Correr-Sobrinho,Lourenço
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Journal of applied oral science (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572010000500007
Resumo: In the most recent decades, several developments have been made on impression materials' composition, but there are very few radiodensity studies in the literature. It is expected that an acceptable degree of radiodensity would enable the detection of small fragments left inside gingival sulcus or root canals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the radiodensity of different impression materials, and to compare them to human and bovine enamel and dentin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five impression materials, from 5 classes, were studied: addition and condensation silicones, polyether, polysulfides and alginates. Five 1-mm-thick samples of each material and tooth structure were produced. Each sample was evaluated 3 times (N=15), being exposed to x-ray over a phosphor plate of Digora digital system, and radiodensity was obtained by the software Digora for Windows 2.5 Rev 0. An aluminum stepwedge served as a control. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's method (α=0.05). RESULTS: Different materials and respective classes had a different behavior with respect to radiodensity. Polysulfides showed high values of radiodensity, comparable to human enamel (p&gt;0.05), but not to bovine enamel (p<0.05). Human dentin was similar only to a heavy-body addition silicon material, but bovine dentin was similar to several materials. Generally, heavy-body materials showed higher radiodensity than light-body ones (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Impression materials' radiodensity are influenced by composition, and almost all of them would present a difficult detection against enamel or dentin background in radiographic examinations.
id USP-17_dc6666c555c481c89eb318e721e09b8e
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1678-77572010000500007
network_acronym_str USP-17
network_name_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structuresRadiographyDental impression materialsEnamelDentinHuman toothBovine toothIn the most recent decades, several developments have been made on impression materials' composition, but there are very few radiodensity studies in the literature. It is expected that an acceptable degree of radiodensity would enable the detection of small fragments left inside gingival sulcus or root canals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the radiodensity of different impression materials, and to compare them to human and bovine enamel and dentin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five impression materials, from 5 classes, were studied: addition and condensation silicones, polyether, polysulfides and alginates. Five 1-mm-thick samples of each material and tooth structure were produced. Each sample was evaluated 3 times (N=15), being exposed to x-ray over a phosphor plate of Digora digital system, and radiodensity was obtained by the software Digora for Windows 2.5 Rev 0. An aluminum stepwedge served as a control. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's method (α=0.05). RESULTS: Different materials and respective classes had a different behavior with respect to radiodensity. Polysulfides showed high values of radiodensity, comparable to human enamel (p&gt;0.05), but not to bovine enamel (p<0.05). Human dentin was similar only to a heavy-body addition silicon material, but bovine dentin was similar to several materials. Generally, heavy-body materials showed higher radiodensity than light-body ones (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Impression materials' radiodensity are influenced by composition, and almost all of them would present a difficult detection against enamel or dentin background in radiographic examinations.Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP2010-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572010000500007Journal of Applied Oral Science v.18 n.5 2010reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP10.1590/S1678-77572010000500007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFonseca,Rodrigo BorgesBranco,Carolina AssafHaiter-Neto,FranciscoGonçalves,Luciano de SouzaSoares,Carlos JoséCarlo,Hugo LemesSinhoreti,Mário Alexandre CoelhoCorrer-Sobrinho,Lourençoeng2010-11-05T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1678-77572010000500007Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2010-11-05T00:00Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
title Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
spellingShingle Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
Fonseca,Rodrigo Borges
Radiography
Dental impression materials
Enamel
Dentin
Human tooth
Bovine tooth
title_short Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
title_full Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
title_fullStr Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
title_full_unstemmed Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
title_sort Radiodensity evaluation of dental impression materials in comparison to tooth structures
author Fonseca,Rodrigo Borges
author_facet Fonseca,Rodrigo Borges
Branco,Carolina Assaf
Haiter-Neto,Francisco
Gonçalves,Luciano de Souza
Soares,Carlos José
Carlo,Hugo Lemes
Sinhoreti,Mário Alexandre Coelho
Correr-Sobrinho,Lourenço
author_role author
author2 Branco,Carolina Assaf
Haiter-Neto,Francisco
Gonçalves,Luciano de Souza
Soares,Carlos José
Carlo,Hugo Lemes
Sinhoreti,Mário Alexandre Coelho
Correr-Sobrinho,Lourenço
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Fonseca,Rodrigo Borges
Branco,Carolina Assaf
Haiter-Neto,Francisco
Gonçalves,Luciano de Souza
Soares,Carlos José
Carlo,Hugo Lemes
Sinhoreti,Mário Alexandre Coelho
Correr-Sobrinho,Lourenço
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Radiography
Dental impression materials
Enamel
Dentin
Human tooth
Bovine tooth
topic Radiography
Dental impression materials
Enamel
Dentin
Human tooth
Bovine tooth
description In the most recent decades, several developments have been made on impression materials' composition, but there are very few radiodensity studies in the literature. It is expected that an acceptable degree of radiodensity would enable the detection of small fragments left inside gingival sulcus or root canals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the radiodensity of different impression materials, and to compare them to human and bovine enamel and dentin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-five impression materials, from 5 classes, were studied: addition and condensation silicones, polyether, polysulfides and alginates. Five 1-mm-thick samples of each material and tooth structure were produced. Each sample was evaluated 3 times (N=15), being exposed to x-ray over a phosphor plate of Digora digital system, and radiodensity was obtained by the software Digora for Windows 2.5 Rev 0. An aluminum stepwedge served as a control. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's method (α=0.05). RESULTS: Different materials and respective classes had a different behavior with respect to radiodensity. Polysulfides showed high values of radiodensity, comparable to human enamel (p&gt;0.05), but not to bovine enamel (p<0.05). Human dentin was similar only to a heavy-body addition silicon material, but bovine dentin was similar to several materials. Generally, heavy-body materials showed higher radiodensity than light-body ones (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Impression materials' radiodensity are influenced by composition, and almost all of them would present a difficult detection against enamel or dentin background in radiographic examinations.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010-10-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572010000500007
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572010000500007
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1678-77572010000500007
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science v.18 n.5 2010
reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Journal of applied oral science (Online)
collection Journal of applied oral science (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||jaos@usp.br
_version_ 1748936436138115072