Vinylpolysiloxane impression materials (VPS) exhibit an apolar (hydrophobic) backbone chemistry. Hence, surfactants are added to improve their hydrophilicity for impression-taking in moist environments. However, the mechanisms at the liquid-VPS-interface regarding the surfactant are unknown. We hypothesized that surfactant is leached from the VPS. Four experimental VPS formulations were fabricated containing 0 (control), 1.5, 3, and 5 wt% non-ionic surfactant. Samples were prepared (n = 6) and contact angles determined 30 min after mixing. After 60 sec, droplets were transferred onto the control. Mass spectrometry was used to analyze the droplets. Contact angles were inversely correlated with the surfactant concentration (p < 0.05). Droplets transferred from hydrophilized specimens onto the control showed similar contact angles. Surfactant could be clearly identified inside the droplets from the hydrophilized samples, however, not inside the control. Surfactants reduced the surface tension of the liquid in contact and did not change the surface properties of the VPS itself.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anusavice KJ, editor -2003-. Phillips’ science of dental materials. St. Louis: Saunders.
2.
Beier US, Grunert I, Kulmer S, Dumfahrt H -2007-. Quality of impressions using hydrophilic polyvinyl siloxane in a clinical study of 249 patients. Int J Prosthodont20:270–274.
3.
Blatz MB, Sadan A, Burgess JO, Mercante D, Hoist S -2005-. Selected characteristics of a new polyvinyl siloxane impression material—a randomized clinical trial. Quintessence Int36:97–104.
4.
Böning KW, Walter MH, Schuette U -1998-. Clinical significance of surface activation of silicone impression materials. J Dent26:447–452.
5.
Chai JY, Yeung TC -1991-. Wettability of nonaqueous elastomeric impression materials. Int J Prosthodont4:555–560.
6.
Chong YH, Soh G, Setchell DJ, Wickens JL -1990-. Relationship between contact angles of die stone on elastomeric impression materials and voids in stone casts. Dent Mater6:162–166.
7.
Cohen LH, Gusev AI -2002-. Small molecule analysis by MALDI mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem373:571–586.
8.
Cullen DR, Mikesell JW, Sandrik JL -1991-. Wettability of elastomeric impression materials and voids in gypsum casts. J Prosthet Dent66:261–265.
9.
Grundke K, Michel S, Knispel G, Grundler A -2008-. Wettability of silicone and polyether impression materials: Characterization by surface tension and contact angle measurements. Colloids Surf A: Physicochem Eng Aspects317:598–609.
10.
ISO, International Standardization Organization -2000-. Dental materials: sciences and health care module 5: dentistry-elastomeric impression materials. BSEN ISO 4823:2001.
11.
Kanehira M, Finger WJ, Komatsu M -2007-. Surface detail reproduction with new elastomeric dental impression materials. Quintessence Int38:479–488.
12.
Karas M, Bahr U -1990-. Laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry of large biomolecules. Trends Anal Chem9:321–325.
13.
Kugel G, Klettke T, Goldberg JA, Benchimol J, Perry RD, Sharma S -2007-. Investigation of a new approach to measuring contact angles for hydrophilic impression materials. J Prosthodont16:84–92.
14.
Lee DY, Oh YI, Chung KH, Kim KM, Kim KN -2004-. Mechanism study on surface activation of surfactant-modified polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. J Applied Polymer Sci92:2395–2401.
15.
Mandikos MN -1998-. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical use. Aust Dent J43:428–434.
16.
McCormick JT, Antony SJ, Dial ML, Duncanson MG Jr, Shillingburg HT Jr -1989-. Wettability of elastomeric impression materials: effect of selected surfactants. Int J Prosthodont2:413–420.
17.
Mondon M, Ziegler C -2003-. Changes in water contact angles during the first phase of setting of dental impression materials. Int J Prosthodont16:49–53.
18.
Nichols PV -1999-. Hydrophilicity? Aust Dent J44:285–286.
19.
Norling BK, Reisbick MH -1979-. The effect of nonionic surfactants on bubble entrapment in elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent42:342–347.
20.
Oh YI, Lee DY, Hwang SY, Kim KN, Kim KM -2003-. Effect of non-ionic surfactants on surface properties of hydrophilic polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. Colloids Surf A-Physicochem Eng Aspects229:9–17.
21.
Petrie CS, Walker MP, O’Mahony AM, Spencer P -2003-. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under dry, moist, and wet conditions. J Prosthet Dent90:365–372.
22.
Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E -1988-. Impression materials: effect of hydrophilicity and viscosity on ability to displace water from dentin surfaces. Eur J Oral Sci96:253–259.
23.
Pratten DH, Craig RG -1989-. Wettability of a hydrophilic addition silicone impression material. J Prosthet Dent61:197–202.
24.
Ragain JC, Grosko ML, Raj M, Ryan TN, Johnston WM -2000-. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations. Int J Prosthodont13:214–220.
25.
Rupp F, Axmann D, Jacobi A, Groten M, Geis-Gerstörfer J -2005-. Hydrophilicity of elastomeric non-aqueous impression materials during setting. Dent Mater21:94–102.
26.
Seo J, Lee LP -2006-. Effects on wettability by surfactant accumulation/depletion in bulk polydimethylsiloxane -PDMS-. Sensors and Actuators B-Chemical119:192–198.
27.
Stewardson DA -2005-. Trends in indirect dentistry: 5. Impression materials and techniques. Dent Update32:374–384.
28.
Sumiya H, Lowell DW, Jacobi R, Brackett SE -1997-. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. Shillinburg HT, editor. Chicago: Quintessence.
29.
Takahashi H, Finger WJ -1991-. Dentin surface reproduction with hydrophilic and hydrophobic impression materials. Dent Mater7:197–201.
30.
Vassilakos N, Fernandes CP -1993a-. Surface properties of elastomeric impression materials. J Dent21:297–301.
31.
Vassilakos N, Fernandes CP -1993b-. Effect of salivary films on the surface properties of elastomeric impression materials. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent2:29–33.
