The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Drying time of tray adhesive for adequate tensile bond strength between polyvinylsiloxane impression and tray resin material

  • Yi, Myong-Hee (Ilsan Hospital, Department of Dental Science, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Shim, Joon-Sung (Department of Dental Science, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee, Keun-Woo (Department of Dental Science, The Graduate School, Yonsei University) ;
  • Chung, Moon-Kyu (Department of Dental Science, The Graduate School, Yonsei University)
  • Published : 2009.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM. Use of custom tray and tray adhesive is clinically recommended for elastomeric impression material. However there is not clear mention of drying time of tray adhesive in achieving appropriate bonding strength of tray material and impression material. PURPOSE. This study is to investigate an appropriate drying time of tray adhesives by evaluating tensile bonding strength between two types of polyvinylsiloxane impression materials and resin tray, according to various drying time intervals of tray adhesives, and with different manufacturing company combination of impression material and tray adhesive. MATERIAL AND METHODS. Adhesives used in this study were Silfix (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del, USA) and VPS Tray Adhesive (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) and impression materials were Aquasil Ultra (monophase regular set, Dentsply Caulk, Milford, Del, USA) and Imprint II Garant (regular body, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany). They were used combinations from the same manufacture and exchanged combinations of the two. The drying time was designed to air dry, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 15 minutes, 20 minutes, and 25 minutes. Total 240 of test specimens were prepared by auto-polymerizing tray material(Instant Tray Mix, Lang, Wheeling, Il, USA) with 10 specimens in each group. The specimens were placed in the Universal Testing machine (Instron, model 3366, Instron Corp, University avenue, Nowood, MA, USA) to perform the tensile test (cross head speed 5 mm/min). The statistically efficient drying time was evaluated through ANOVA and Scheffe test. All the tests were performed at 95% confidence level. RESULTS. The results revealed that at least 10 minutes is needed for Silfix-Aquasil, and 15 minutes for VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II, to attain an appropriate tensile bonding strength. VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II had a superior tensile bonding strength when compared to Silfix-Aquasil over 15 minutes. Silfix-Aquasil had a superior bonding strength to VPS Tray Adhesive-Aquasil, and VPS Tray Adhesive-Imprint II had a superior tensile bonding strength to Silfix-Imprint II at all drying periods. CONCLUSION. Significant increase in tensile bonding strength with Silfix-Aquasil and VPS Tray adhesive-Imprint II combination until 10 and 15 minutes respectively. Tray adhesive-impression material combination from the same company presented higher tensile bonding strength at all drying time intervals than when using tray adhesive-impression material of different manufactures.

Keywords

References

  1. Frazier KB, Mjor IA. The teaching of all-ceramic restorations in North American dental schools: materials and techniques employed. J Esthet Dent 1997;9:86-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1997.tb00922.x
  2. Chee WW, Donovan TE. Polyvinyl Siloxane impression materials: a review of properties and techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:728-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90192-D
  3. Williams PT, Jackson DG, Bergman W. An evaluation of the timedependent dimensional stability of eleven elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1984;52:120-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(84)90194-X
  4. Eames WB, Sieweke JC, Wallace SW, Rogers LB. Elastomeric impression materials: effect of bulk on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent 1979;41:304-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(79)90013-1
  5. Sandrik JL, Vacco JL. Tensile and bond strength of putty-wash elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:358-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(83)80092-4
  6. Gordon GE, Johnson GH, Drennon DG. The effect of tray selection on the accuracy of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:12-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90257-D
  7. Nicholson JW, Porter KH, Dolan T. Strength of tray adhesives for elastomeric impression materials. Oper Dent 1985;10:12-6.
  8. Tjan AH, Whang SB. Tensile and peel bond strengths of tray treatment on the accuracy of dies. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:175-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(87)90172-7
  9. Grant BE, Tjan AH. Tensile and peel bond strengths of tray adhesives. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:165-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90009-1
  10. Bomberg TJ, Goldfogel DJ, Hoffman W Jr, Bomberg SE. Considerations for adhesion of impression materials to impression trays. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60:681-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90398-8
  11. Sulong MZ, Setchell DJ. Properties of the tray adhesive of an addition polymerizing silicone to impression tray materials. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66:743-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90407-N
  12. Payne JA, Pereira BP. Bond strength of two nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials bonded to two thermoplastic resin tray materials. J Prosthet Dent 1995;74:563-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80306-3
  13. Bindra B, Heath JR. Adhesion of elastomeric impression materials to trays. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24:63-9. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1997.00458.x
  14. Dixon DL, Breeding LC, Bosser MJ, Nafso AJ. The effect of custom tray material type and surface treatment on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6:303-6.
  15. Hogans WR 3rd, Agar JR. The bond strength of elastomer tray adhesives to thermoplastic and acrylic resin tray materials. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:541-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90087-Q
  16. Cho GC, Donovan TE, Chee WW, White SN. Tensile bond strength of polyvinyl siloxane impressions bonded to a custom tray as a function of drying time: Part I. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:419-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(05)80068-X
  17. Dixon DL, Breeding LC, Brown JS. The effect of custom tray material type and adhesive drying time on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system. Int J Prosthodont 1994;7:129-33.
  18. Davis GB, Moser JB, Brinsden GI. The bonding properties of elastomer tray adhesives. J Prosthet Dent 1976;36:278-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(76)90183-9
  19. Peregrina A, Land MF, Wandling C, Johnston WM. The effect of different adhesives on vinyl polysiloxane bond strength to two tray materials. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94:209-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.06.011

Cited by

  1. Compatibility of a Silicone Impression/Adhesive System to FDM-Printed Tray Materials—A Laboratory Peel-off Study vol.11, pp.10, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11101905
  2. Evaluation of the Bond Strength of Universal Tray Adhesives on Silicone Impression Materials Using an Acrylic Tray vol.20, pp.12, 2019, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2699