Medium-viscosity polyether impression material: a case report.

A V Ritter; E J Swift

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11968150

Medium-viscosity polyether impression material: a case report.

A V Ritter·E J Swift

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Polyethers are elastomeric materials commonly used for making precision impressions. They are hydrophilic, which facilitates the contact of the unset material with the intraoral tissue and the wetting of the impression by cast materials. The final hardness of this new impression material is reduced in an attempt to overcome rigidity of the set impression. A case is described involving the restoration of a fractured maxillary premolar and a single-phase impression technique using the new polyether impression material.

Explore related subjects

Bicuspid Crowns Dental Impression Materials Dental Impression Technique Dental Porcelain Dental Prosthesis Design Humans Metal Ceramic Alloys Resins, Synthetic Tooth Fractures Viscosity Case Reports Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

A V Ritter, E J Swift. 2000. Medium-viscosity polyether impression material: a case report.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11968150/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Multiple macrodontic multituberculism.

Ekman-Westborg and Julin [1974: Oral Surg 38:217-222], described multiple macrodontia and multituberculism affecting the teeth without other anomalies (E-WJ). We describe a Chilean case in a 12-year-old with the typical dental alterations and with histopathologic findings that include absence of predentin layer and prominent reduced enamel epithelium. E-WJ is not a syndrome and we propose "multiple macrodontic multituberculism" as a better name for this anomaly of uncertain etiology affecting only the crowns of the teeth.

Bicuspid↗

PubMed2003

[Video-assisted endoscopic sinus revision for treatment of chronic, unilateral odontogenic maxillary sinusitis].

BACKGROUND: The proportion of dental causes of maxillary sinusitis is estimated between 10% and 40%. The mechanisms are manifold and originate from the close relation of the side teeth and the maxillary sinus. In the past, the transantral approach was commonly used by maxillofacial surgeons as their first choice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 01/1999 and 10/2001 38 patients underwent endoscopic surgery controlled via the fossa canina. Apart from the mandatory treatment of the dental focus and the mucosal pathologies, a fenestration to the middle meatus of the nose was performed in 7 cases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The dental medical history, OPG, CT scans in coronary plane, endoscopic findings, and histology showed the commonly "silent" course of dental sinusitis. Typical findings in CT scans are unilateral basal maxillary opacities adjacent to the molar and premolar teeth. In 20% of the cases there was also a blockade of the infundibulum. All patients were reexamined 6-12 months postoperatively. The patients are free of symptoms, but sometimes suffer from headaches. An exact diagnosis and the clear separation of rhinogenic causes are vital points for the therapy of dental sinusitis. In cases of unilateral sinusitis, a comprehensive investigation by the maxillofacial surgeon should be recommended. Video-assisted endoscopic sinus revision is preferable to the transantral approach and is especially suitable for the treatment of mucosal retention cysts, the removal of foreign bodies, endoscopically controlled resections of apical roots, elevations of the sinus floor, and dental implants. If the ethmoidal infundibulum and maxillary ostium are open, no fenestration is needed. In cases of blockade, fenestration to the middle nose canal is indicated.

Bicuspid↗

PubMed2003

Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.

This review is a survey of prospective studies on the clinical performance of posterior resin composites published between 1996 and 2002. Material, patient- and operator-specific data, observation periods, isolation methods of the operative field, and failure rates are detailed in tables. The data were evaluated statistically in order to assess the role of materials (filler size, bonding system, base materials [e.g. glass ionomer cements], and lining materials), study design, and personnel on failure rates. The primary reasons for composite failure were secondary caries, restoration fracture, and marginal defects. The influence of different commercial material brands on failure rates was not evaluated due to the great variety of test substances and the lack of material-specific documentation. Effects of the isolation method of the operative field (rubber dam or cotton rolls) and the professional status of operators (university or general dentist) on composite failure rates were not found to be significant. Observation periods varied from 1 to 17 years, and failure rates ranged between 0% and 45%. A linear correlation between failure rate and observation period was found (P<0.0001). Thirteen of 24 studies were terminated after 3 years, while seven studies continued for more than 10 years, indicating that favourable results for composite materials are frequently based on short-term results, despite higher dropout rates in longer studies. To determine accurately the risk for patients, long-term, randomised, controlled clinical trials of treatment outcomes with composites used in posterior teeth are clearly needed.

Bicuspid↗