PubMed · 7094469
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M A Wehbé. 1982. Plaster uses and misuses.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7094469/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Difficulties in sterilizing impressions by traditional methods have led to chemical disinfection as an alternative, and some studies have shown that disinfectants may adversely affect impressions. PURPOSE: This study investigated the effect of disinfection methods on the dimensional stability of 6 elastomeric materials. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Impression materials were submitted to the following treatments: immersion in 5.25% sodium hypochlorite solution for 10 minutes, immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde solution for 30 minutes, and no immersion (control). After treatments, impressions were poured, and respective stone casts were measured with a Nikon Profile projector and compared with the master model. RESULTS: The elastomeric materials had different reproduction capacities, and the disinfecting treatments did not differ from the control.
The aim of this study was to compare, in vitro, the ability of temporary versus permanent materials to seal the access cavity. Eighty human maxillary single-canal teeth were prepared biomechanically and obturated with gutta-percha and an endodontic cement AH Plus, using the warm vertical compaction technique. All access cavities were sealed with 1 of 4 materials (Cavit, Fermit, Tetric, or Dyract). Microleakage was assessed by methylene blue dye penetration. The teeth were submitted to 100 thermocycles, with temperature varying from 0 degree to 55 degrees C. The greatest degree of leakage was observed with the temporary materials (Cavit and Fermit). There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in leakage between all materials except between Dyract and Tetric. This suggests that it may be more prudent to use a permanent restorative material for provisional restorations to prevent inadequate canal sealing and the resulting risk of fluid penetration.