IADR Abstract Archives
Polyether Impressions and Immediate Dentin Sealing With Universal Adhesives
Objectives: Polyether impression materials (PEI) have been shown to interact with dental adhesives applied to freshly prepared dentin for immediate dentin sealing (IDS), leading to faulty impressions. The aim of this study was to assess the interaction between a PEI and dentin surfaces coated with universal adhesives.
Methods: Extracted bovine incisors were embedded in cold-cure acrylic resin, followed by grinding the labial surface to dentin. The dentin was etched with phosphoric acid, and either 3M™ Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive (SBU, 3M), 3M™ Scotchbond™ Universal Plus Adhesive (SBUP, 3M) or OptiBond™ FL (OFL, Kerr) were applied and light cured according to the instructions for use (n=12). For half of each series, the oxygen inhibited layer (OIL) of the adhesive was wiped off using an ethanol-soaked tissue (n=6). Then, PEI (3M™ Impregum™ Penta™ Soft, 3M) was applied to the adhesive surface. After 6min at 23°C, the cured PEI was removed, and the quality of the impression was visually inspected.
Results: The table shows the number of faulty impressions (adhesive remnants, unpolymerized or torn PEI) per group (n=6). Data were analyzed by Two Proportions Tests using Fisher’s exact method (p<0.05). Entries with same letters are statistically not different. For the interaction of the PEI with the OIL of OFL, all impressions were faulty. All other groups did not show faulty impressions.
Conclusions: Based on these in vitro data, the use of PEI with SBU or SBUP for IDS does not lead to faulty impressions, regardless of presence or absence of an OIL. Wiping with an ethanol impregnated tissue is an effective method to remove the OIL of OFL, avoiding faulty PEI impressions.
Methods: Extracted bovine incisors were embedded in cold-cure acrylic resin, followed by grinding the labial surface to dentin. The dentin was etched with phosphoric acid, and either 3M™ Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive (SBU, 3M), 3M™ Scotchbond™ Universal Plus Adhesive (SBUP, 3M) or OptiBond™ FL (OFL, Kerr) were applied and light cured according to the instructions for use (n=12). For half of each series, the oxygen inhibited layer (OIL) of the adhesive was wiped off using an ethanol-soaked tissue (n=6). Then, PEI (3M™ Impregum™ Penta™ Soft, 3M) was applied to the adhesive surface. After 6min at 23°C, the cured PEI was removed, and the quality of the impression was visually inspected.
Results: The table shows the number of faulty impressions (adhesive remnants, unpolymerized or torn PEI) per group (n=6). Data were analyzed by Two Proportions Tests using Fisher’s exact method (p<0.05). Entries with same letters are statistically not different. For the interaction of the PEI with the OIL of OFL, all impressions were faulty. All other groups did not show faulty impressions.
Conclusions: Based on these in vitro data, the use of PEI with SBU or SBUP for IDS does not lead to faulty impressions, regardless of presence or absence of an OIL. Wiping with an ethanol impregnated tissue is an effective method to remove the OIL of OFL, avoiding faulty PEI impressions.