Objectives: The accuracy of impression materials is important for the fit of crowns and consequently for the long term stability of prosthodontic treatment. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy of the working-cast compared to the original abutment using a new polyether-material in comparison to two established impression-materials. Materials and methods: A model of four metal abutments with two corresponding surfaces served as a master-cast. The following materials were tested: Impregum-Penta-Soft (IPS, 3M-Espe), Monopren-Transfer (MT, Kettenbach), P2-MonoPhase (P2MP, Heraeus-Kulzer) and P2-Heavy/Light (P2HL, Heraeus-Kulzer). In group 1 the impressions were taken as fast as possible and poured after 1-2 hours, whereas in group 2 the impressions were poured after 72 hours. In group 3 impressions were taken at the end of the recommended working time (delayed application). 10 impressions were taken in each group in an one-step putty-wash-technique. Differences in diameter (DID) between casting and master-cast were determined and statistically analysed by non-paramteric-tests (U-Test; p=0.05). Results: The median values of the DID ranged from –0.05 to 0.32% (group 1), from 0.01 to 0.33% (group 2) and from –0.17 to 0.37% (group 3). Delayed pouring of the impressions led to significant changes in diameters using MT and IPS (p<0.01) but not for P2MP and P2HL (p>0.05). However, DID were higher for P2MP and P2HL compared to IPS and MT. Delayed application led to significant change of DID for IPS, P2MP and P2HL (p<0.05) but not for MT (p>0.05). Conclusions: Under the limits of this study it can be concluded, that all impression materials tested have the potential for clinical acceptable results.

Back to the Prosthodontics Research Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 82nd General Session (March 10-13, 2004)

Top Level Search