Method: For selected commercially available PVS products– Aquasil (Caulk/Dentsply, Milford, DE), Honigum (DMG corporation), Delikit (Happy den, Korea) and Imprint II (3M dental products) as the control - appyHhydrophilicities were examined. Twenty specimens for each four impression materials were used in this study. Compressed air was not applied for the 80 specimens on Group I and 80 specimens on Group II were treated with compressed air after application of PVS impression materials. A metal die was made identical in shape with a tooth prepared for a full veneer crown and the margin was formed 2mm subgingivally. A resin custom tray was fabricated with space for impression material. After submerging the metal die in human saliva for 15 minutes, it was washed with a three way syringe for 10 seconds and the tray was placed with impression materials applied. In Group II air was applied with a three way syringe for 3 seconds around the margin immediately after the application of impression material. All processes were performed by one person. The number of voids in the impression was counted through loupe (x10 magnification). The data was were analyzed with Two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s HSD.
Result: Group II showed statistically significantly less voids than Group I. Aquasil resulted in more voids than any other specimens in Group I and differences between specimens other than Aquasil were statistically not significant. Imprint showed the least number of voids among VPS impression materials.
Conclusion: It is concluded that blowing compressed air around margins after applying impression materials can reduce voids.