Evaluation of One- and Two-Step Impression Techniques and Vertical Marginal Misfit in Fixed Prothesis
Objectives/Purposes. This study compared one-step and two-step impression techniques. Methods. 12 impressions were made of a resin maxillary model (second premolar and second molar) with two prepared abutment teeth using vinyl polysiloxane (VPS); the margin of the second premolar was 0.5 mm subgingi...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Dentistry |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/9898446 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objectives/Purposes. This study compared one-step and two-step impression techniques. Methods. 12 impressions were made of a resin maxillary model (second premolar and second molar) with two prepared abutment teeth using vinyl polysiloxane (VPS); the margin of the second premolar was 0.5 mm subgingivally; and the margin of the second molar tooth was at the level of the gingiva. Impressions were made using two techniques: one-step and two-step putty/light materials. A three-unit metal framework was fabricated on the master model using the computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technique. The vertical marginal misfit was evaluated in the buccal, lingual, and mesial and distal surfaces of the abutments on the gypsum casts using a light microscope. Data were analyzed using the independent t-test (α < 0.05). Results. The results showed significantly lower vertical marginal misfit in all six areas evaluated around the two abutments in the two-step impression technique compared with the corresponding values in the one-step technique. Conclusion. Vertical marginal misfit in the two-step technique with a preliminary putty impression was significantly lower than in the one-step putty/light-body technique. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1687-8736 |