The Pile Channel Injection Technique For Post And Core Restorations With Polysiloxane Impression In A Vitro Experimental Study

ObjectiveTo observe the effects of four common clinical methods for post and core restorations withpolysiloxane impression in a vitro experimental study. Research results provide reliable evidencefor the selection of method for clinical impression, improve the quality of clinical impression andperfect restorations and related clinical treatment, while providing experimental reference forimproving the design of the silicone rubber injection gun.Materials and methodsWe made a vitro pile channel model to simulate human oral temperature, the differentnumbers of root canal. In the present study, four different methods were took for making siliconerubber seal dies. Group A: special silicone rubber gun injection; Group B: special silicone rubbergun cooperating with machine auger conveyor injection; Group C: special silicone rubber guncooperating with hand auger conveyor injection; Group D: the pile channel injection. Eachmethod was took for making30single root canal-silicone rubber seal dies and30double rootcanal-silicone rubber seal dies, a total of240silicone rubber seal dies. Examine whether there isan defect or bubble in the impression, and observe the number, size and distribution of thebubble. The diameter of defect or bubble was measured with a vernier caliper, and photographed.The measured value was corrected by Vixwin Pro software. The total area of defects andbubbles by Vixwin Pro software were calculated. Based on the total area of defects and bubbles,four assessment criteria were evaluated: excellent, good, qualified and unqualified.Results1. The success rate of single pile channel-polysiloxane impression is significantly higherthan double root canal group(P<0.05).2. There exists a significant difference between success rates of different impression methods, and the method of Group D is superior to the remaining three methods(P<0.05).Nemenyi test shows that the success rates of pile channel-impression have significant differencesbetween Group D and Group A, Group D and Group B, Group D and Group C, Group C andGroup A, Group B and Group A(P<0.05). There is no statistical difference between Group B andGroup C(P>0.05).3. Four difference silicone rubber impression methods have a significant impact on thenumber of bubbles on the impression surface(P<0.05); Bubbles are mainly located in the apical1/3of pile channel-impression(P<0.05); Four difference silicone rubber impression methodshave no impact on the size of bubbles on the impression surface(P>0.05).Conclusions1. The success rate of single pile channel-polysiloxane impression is significantly higherthan double root canal group.2. Among four difference silicone rubber impression methods, the success rates of the pilechannel injection is highest, and the success rates of the special silicone rubber gun injection islowest.3. The success rates has no significant difference between special silicone rubber guncooperating with machine auger conveyor injection and special silicone rubber gun cooperatingwith hand auger conveyor injection.4. Four difference silicone rubber impression methods have a significant impact on thenumber of bubbles on the impression surface.5. Bubbles are mainly located in the apical1/3of pile channel-impression.6. Four difference silicone rubber impression methods have no impact on the size ofbubbles on the impression surface.