The Experts below are selected from a list of 159 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Wlodzimierz Wieckiewicz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the setting time of polyether impression materials after contact with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Marek Zietek, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Purpose The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents. Materials and Methods The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents. Conclusions The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
-
polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Statement of problem No consensus exists as to the compatibility of chemical agents used with gingival displacement methods with different impression materials. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents on the polymerization time of polyvinyl siloxane impression elastomers. Material and methods The study comprised 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). The polymerization time of 240 specimens (weight 3.3 g) of 4 polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression elastomers, type 3 (Colorise Thermochromic, Hydrorise, Express, and Take 1 Advanced), after mixing with 20 μL of each displacement agent, was measured with a viscometer. The 24 specimens from the control group were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The studies were performed at 23°C and 37°C (±0.1°C). Results A polymerization time compatibility index (PTCI) was devised, where the polymerization time of PVS mixed with the displacement agents was expressed as the percentage of the standard polymerization time of the impression material. The PTCI values at 23°C were higher than those at 37°C for both groups of displacement agents. At 37°C, the experimental displacement agents achieved higher PTCI values than the conventional agents. Conclusions All of the evaluated displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures induced changes in the polymerization time of PVS. Therefore, chemical displacement agents should not come into direct contact with PVS impression materials.
Danuta Nowakowska - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the setting time of polyether impression materials after contact with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Marek Zietek, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Purpose The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents. Materials and Methods The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents. Conclusions The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
-
polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Statement of problem No consensus exists as to the compatibility of chemical agents used with gingival displacement methods with different impression materials. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents on the polymerization time of polyvinyl siloxane impression elastomers. Material and methods The study comprised 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). The polymerization time of 240 specimens (weight 3.3 g) of 4 polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression elastomers, type 3 (Colorise Thermochromic, Hydrorise, Express, and Take 1 Advanced), after mixing with 20 μL of each displacement agent, was measured with a viscometer. The 24 specimens from the control group were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The studies were performed at 23°C and 37°C (±0.1°C). Results A polymerization time compatibility index (PTCI) was devised, where the polymerization time of PVS mixed with the displacement agents was expressed as the percentage of the standard polymerization time of the impression material. The PTCI values at 23°C were higher than those at 37°C for both groups of displacement agents. At 37°C, the experimental displacement agents achieved higher PTCI values than the conventional agents. Conclusions All of the evaluated displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures induced changes in the polymerization time of PVS. Therefore, chemical displacement agents should not come into direct contact with PVS impression materials.
Jolanta Saczko - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the setting time of polyether impression materials after contact with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Marek Zietek, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Purpose The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents. Materials and Methods The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents. Conclusions The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
-
polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Statement of problem No consensus exists as to the compatibility of chemical agents used with gingival displacement methods with different impression materials. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents on the polymerization time of polyvinyl siloxane impression elastomers. Material and methods The study comprised 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). The polymerization time of 240 specimens (weight 3.3 g) of 4 polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression elastomers, type 3 (Colorise Thermochromic, Hydrorise, Express, and Take 1 Advanced), after mixing with 20 μL of each displacement agent, was measured with a viscometer. The 24 specimens from the control group were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The studies were performed at 23°C and 37°C (±0.1°C). Results A polymerization time compatibility index (PTCI) was devised, where the polymerization time of PVS mixed with the displacement agents was expressed as the percentage of the standard polymerization time of the impression material. The PTCI values at 23°C were higher than those at 37°C for both groups of displacement agents. At 37°C, the experimental displacement agents achieved higher PTCI values than the conventional agents. Conclusions All of the evaluated displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures induced changes in the polymerization time of PVS. Therefore, chemical displacement agents should not come into direct contact with PVS impression materials.
Zbigniew Raszewski - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the setting time of polyether impression materials after contact with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Marek Zietek, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Purpose The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents. Materials and Methods The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents. Conclusions The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
-
polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Statement of problem No consensus exists as to the compatibility of chemical agents used with gingival displacement methods with different impression materials. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents on the polymerization time of polyvinyl siloxane impression elastomers. Material and methods The study comprised 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). The polymerization time of 240 specimens (weight 3.3 g) of 4 polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression elastomers, type 3 (Colorise Thermochromic, Hydrorise, Express, and Take 1 Advanced), after mixing with 20 μL of each displacement agent, was measured with a viscometer. The 24 specimens from the control group were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The studies were performed at 23°C and 37°C (±0.1°C). Results A polymerization time compatibility index (PTCI) was devised, where the polymerization time of PVS mixed with the displacement agents was expressed as the percentage of the standard polymerization time of the impression material. The PTCI values at 23°C were higher than those at 37°C for both groups of displacement agents. At 37°C, the experimental displacement agents achieved higher PTCI values than the conventional agents. Conclusions All of the evaluated displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures induced changes in the polymerization time of PVS. Therefore, chemical displacement agents should not come into direct contact with PVS impression materials.
Julita Kulbacka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the setting time of polyether impression materials after contact with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthodontics, 2018Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Marek Zietek, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Purpose The compatibility of chemical gingival margin displacement agents with polyether impression materials has not been determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the setting time of polyether impression elastomers after contact with conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents. Materials and Methods The study compared the setting time of two polyether impression materials: medium body (Impregum Penta Soft) and light body (Impregum Garant L DuoSoft) after contact with 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). As many as 120 specimens (60 light body and 60 medium body) were mixed with 20 μl of each of 10 gingival displacement agents, and the time to achieve maximum viscosity was measured with a viscometer. The setting times of these specimens were compared with the control group of 12 specimens, which were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The experiments were performed in two environments: 23°C and 37°C (± 0.1°C). Individual and average polymerization time compatibility indices (PTCI) were calculated. Data were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results The evaluated chemical displacement agents from both groups changed the setting time of light- and medium-body PE. The negative individual PTCI values achieved astringent (20% aluminum chloride) with two PE in both temperature environments. The average PTCI values of the experimental displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures were significantly higher than the conventional agents. Conclusions The present findings suggest that experimental retraction agents can be recommended clinically as gingival margin displacement agents with minimal effects on the setting time of medium- and light-body polyether impression materials; however, direct contact of chemical displacement agents and polyether impression materials can be avoided.
-
polymerization time compatibility index of polyvinyl siloxane impression materials with conventional and experimental gingival margin displacement agents
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014Co-Authors: Danuta Nowakowska, Zbigniew Raszewski, Jolanta Saczko, Julita Kulbacka, Wlodzimierz WieckiewiczAbstract:Statement of problem No consensus exists as to the compatibility of chemical agents used with gingival displacement methods with different impression materials. Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of conventional and experimental gingival displacement agents on the polymerization time of polyvinyl siloxane impression elastomers. Material and methods The study comprised 10 gingival displacement agents, including 5 conventional astringents (10%, 20%, and 25% aluminum chloride, 25% aluminum sulfate, and 15.5% ferric sulfate) and 5 experimental adrenergics (0.1% and 0.01% HCl-epinephrine, 0.05% HCl-Tetrahydrozoline, 0.05% HCl-oxymetazoline, and 10% HCl-phenylephrine). The polymerization time of 240 specimens (weight 3.3 g) of 4 polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression elastomers, type 3 (Colorise Thermochromic, Hydrorise, Express, and Take 1 Advanced), after mixing with 20 μL of each displacement agent, was measured with a viscometer. The 24 specimens from the control group were polymerized without contact with the displacement agents. The studies were performed at 23°C and 37°C (±0.1°C). Results A polymerization time compatibility index (PTCI) was devised, where the polymerization time of PVS mixed with the displacement agents was expressed as the percentage of the standard polymerization time of the impression material. The PTCI values at 23°C were higher than those at 37°C for both groups of displacement agents. At 37°C, the experimental displacement agents achieved higher PTCI values than the conventional agents. Conclusions All of the evaluated displacement agents at laboratory and intraoral temperatures induced changes in the polymerization time of PVS. Therefore, chemical displacement agents should not come into direct contact with PVS impression materials.
