Does Impression Material Thickness Impact the Accuracy of Addition Silicone Impressions and the Resultant Casts? A 3D Analysis

Page Start

353

Page End

369

D.O.I.

10.1922/EJPRD_2795Negm17

Action

• Enas E. Negm
• Mangala Patel
• Paul Ryan

Abstract

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry (2025) 33, 353–369

Keywords
3D Analysis
Addition Silicone
Gypsum
Tray Spacer
Partially Dentate
Dental Impression

Authors
Enas E. Negm*

§

(BDS, MSc, PhD)

Mangala Patel *

(BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD)

Paul Ryan *

(BDS, MFDS (RCS Eng), MClinDent (Perio),
MPerio (RCS Ed), FDS (Rest Dent), PGCert
FHEA, PhD)

Address for Correspondence
Enas E. Negm *
Email: e.e.e.negm@qmul.ac.uk
* Institute of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and
Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London,
London, United Kingdom
§

Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry,
Tanta University

Received: 30.08.2024
Accepted: 22.06.2025
doi: 10.1922/EJPRD_2795Negm17

Does Impression Material
Thickness Impact the
Accuracy of Addition
Silicone Impressions and
the Resultant Casts? A 3D
Analysis
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Conflicting evidence exists regarding the optimal impression thickness and
the influence of tray spacing on the accuracy of elastomeric impressions and resulting
casts. This study evaluated the effect of three tray spacings (2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm)
on the dimensional accuracy of three addition silicone impression materials (Aquasil,
Panasil, and Elite-HD). Methods: Forty-five impressions of a partially dentate maxillary
resin cast were made using standardized custom trays with designated spacer thicknesses. Impressions were scanned using a desktop scanner, and casts were poured into
type IV dental stone and subsequently scanned. A digital reference cast was generated
and used to superimpose all test scans. Deviations were measured across the full arch,
palate, and dentulous-edentulous (horseshoe) regions using digital metrology software.
Data were analyzed using multiple regression and Tukey HSD post-hoc tests (α = 0.05).
Results: Spacer thickness and material significantly influenced impression and cast accuracy, with higher deviations observed in the horseshoe region compared to the palate
(p < 0.001). Conclusions: Panasil at 6-mm spacing produced the most accurate impressions across all regions. Clinical relevance:For cast accuracy, Elite-HD at 4-mm spacing
showed the lowest deviation in the palate, while Panasil at 2-mm spacing demonstrated
superior accuracy in both full arch and horseshoe regions.

INTRODUCTION
Making an impression is a crucial step in the construction of a fixed or removable dental prosthesis.1 To provide an accurate prosthesis fit, it is essential to accurately capture the tissue surface throughout the impression making procedures.2 Rudd and coworkers3 summarized several potential causes
of ill-fitting removable partial denture frameworks, many of which arise from
technical errors during the impression-making process. These include improper tray selection, inadequate spacer design, poor material handling,
insufficient setting time, and premature removal of the impression.3 Such
procedural inaccuracies can lead to distortion of the impression and subsequent inaccuracy in the resultant stone cast.3 The greatest vertical distortion
has been observed in the palatal region of poured casts, with deviations up
to 302 µm documented.4 Therefore, the accuracy of a removable prosthesis is
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

EJPRD