Shruti Sahay1, Vahini Reddy2 and K Chandrasekharan Nair3*
1Dental Specialist, Sai Dental Care, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
2Former Professor of Prosthodontics, AECS Maaruti College of Dental Sciences, Bangalore, India
3Professor Emeritus, Department of Prosthodontics, Sri Sankara Dental College, Akathumuri, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
*Corresponding Author: K Chandrasekharan Nair, Professor Emeritus, Department of Prosthodontics, Sri Sankara Dental College, Akathumuri, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
Received: February 04, 2022; Published: February 24, 2022
Objectives: Tray adhesives used with putty consistency addition Silicone and condensation silicone elastomeric impression materials on different types of trays viz. metallic trays, perforated metallic trays, plastic trays and perforated plastic trays. Comparison of tensile bond strength of two brands of tray adhesives viz. Coltene and Zhermack when used with addition curing and condensation curing putty consistency impression materials.
Materials and methods: Perforated and non-perforated metallic and plastic discs measuring Disc specimens measuring 64mm x 8mm. Tray adhesive was applied on the tray and allowed to dry for 10 minutes. Uniform thickness of impression material in thickness of 4mm was loaded on to the tray. This assembly was attached to the universal testing machine material and at a cross head speed of 1mm/sec it was pulled until separation occurred. The thrust area of the study was to find out the tensile bond strength of tray adhesives used with putty consistency addition silicone elastomeric impression material and putty consistency condensation silicone elastomeric impression material with different types of impression trays. The test parameters selected for the study were the strength of adhesion betweeni) the two brands of elastomeric impression material used in the study - Coltene vs. Zhermack (ii)the two consistencies of the impression materials - Addition vs. Condensation (iii)Metal tray vs. Plastic tray and (iv)Perforated vs. Nonperforated trays, which comibination is better. Data was statistically analyzed using ANOVA test.
Results: The mean tensile bond strength for metal tray was found as 0.99MPa while plastic trays showed higher bond strength of 1.64 MPa. Perforated tray and nonperforated tray exhibited mean tensile bond strength as 1.29MPa and 1.34MPa respectively. When comparisons were done for tray adhesives the mean retention strength yielded by coltene tray adhesives was 1.34MPa while zhermack tray adhesive yielded 1.29MPa. When combination of different types of trays with tray adhesives and impression materials were evaluated addition silicone with nonperforated plastic tray with coltene tray adhesive exhibited highest tensile bond strength of (1.91MPa) while the lowest tensile bond strength was recorded by the use of metal nonperforated tray with condensation silicone impression materials and zhermack tray adhesives (072MPa). The results obtained were statistically significant.
Conclusions: The best combination that would exhibit the high bond strength is non perforated plastic tray with putty consistency additional silicone impression material and Coltene adhesives
Keywords: Tray Adhesive; Elastomeric Impression Material; Impression Trays Viz; Metallic; Non-Metallic; Metallic Perforated and Non-Metallic Perforated; Tensile Bond Strength
Citation: K Chandrasekharan Nair., et al. “A Study on Tray Adhesives Used with Elastomeric Impression Materials and Different Types of Trays”. Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 6.3 (2022): 81-87.
Copyright: © 2022 K Chandrasekharan Nair., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.