An evaluation of an Iraqi phosphate-bonded investment and a commercial type on the marginal fit of ceramometalcopings using three different investing and burnout techniques
Main Article Content
Abstract
Materials and methods: Sixty wax patterns were fabricated on a standardized prepared brass die representing an upper central incisor by the aid of a custom-made split mold. Three different investing and burnout techniques were applied for an Iraqi investment and a commercial type; Group I:Ring investing with conventional burnout technique (RC);Group II: Ringless investing with conventional burnout technique (RLC);Group III: Ring investing with accelerated burnout technique (RA).Twenty wax patterns of each group were divided into two subgroups according to the type of investment material used (10 for each subgroup) represented as (B) for the BellaStar XL and (W) for the WYMvest investments. Complete castings were finished and seated on the metal die. The accuracy of fit of each coping was determined by measuring the vertical marginal discrepancies between the finish line on the metal die and the margins of each coping at four specific reference points on the labial, mesial, palatal, and distal aspects of the die by the aid of a light microscope supplied with a digital camera.The arithmetic mean of each three records was computed and regarded as the amount of the marginal discrepancy of each coping and was used as a unit for the statistical analysis.
Results: Mean marginal accuracy for W(RLC)was found to be the least (13.839+4.5724 um) while the highest mean value related to B(RLC) (29.033+2.102 um). In general, ANOVA test showed significant results among the mean values of the Binvestment subgroups while LSD test showed non-significance between the (RA) and both the (RC) and (RLC) subgroups. On the other hand, significance was present between the (RLC) and (RA)of the Winvestment subgroups while non-significance was located between the (RC) and both the (RLC) and (RA) subgroups. Comparing similar subgroups of the two tested investments, the Student's t-test showed non-significance between the (RC) subgroups while high significance was located between the (RLC) and (RA) subgroups respectively.Concerning the vertical marginal discrepancy of the copings, applying the (RC) technique for both investments caused non-statistical significance between the labial, mesial, palatal, and distal aspects.The (RLC) technique caused high significance between the four aspects, while the (RA) technique caused non-significance between the labial aspect only and the others.
Conclusion: The Iraqi investment generally produced less vertical marginal discrepancies (using the three different investing and burn-out techniques) than the commercial investment.In order to achieve a better marginal fit, it seems that ceramometalcopings invested with the commercial investment tested are better be cast using the conventional ring investing and burnout technique.
Downloads
Article Details
Licenses and Copyright
The following policy applies in The Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry (JBCD):
# JBCD applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license to articles and other works we publish. If you submit your paper for publication by JBCD, you agree to have the CC BY license applied to your work. Under this Open Access license, you as the author agree that anyone can reuse your article in whole or part for any purpose, for free, even for commercial purposes. Anyone may copy, distribute, or reuse the content as long as the author and original source are properly cited. This facilitates freedom in re-use and also ensures that JBCD content can be mined without barriers for the needs of research.
# If your manuscript contains content such as photos, images, figures, tables, audio files, videos, etc., that you or your co-authors do not own, we will require you to provide us with proof that the owner of that content (a) has given you written permission to use it, and (b) has approved of the CC BY license being applied to their content. We provide a form you can use to ask for and obtain permission from the owner. If you do not have owner permission, we will ask you to remove that content and/or replace it with other content that you own or have such permission to use.Don't assume that you can use any content you find on the Internet, or that the content is fair game just because it isn't clear who the owner is or what license applies.
# Many authors assume that if they previously published a paper through another publisher, they own the rights to that content and they can freely use that content in their paper, but that’s not necessarily the case, it depends on the license that covers the other paper. Some publishers allow free and unrestricted re-use of article content they own, such as under the CC BY license. Other publishers use licenses that allow re-use only if the same license is applied by the person or publisher re-using the content. If the paper was published under a CC BY license or another license that allows free and unrestricted use, you may use the content in your JBCD paper provided that you give proper attribution, as explained above.If the content was published under a more restrictive license, you must ascertain what rights you have under that license. At a minimum, review the license to make sure you can use the content. Contact that JBCD if you have any questions about the license. If the license does not permit you to use the content in a paper that will be covered by an unrestricted license, you must obtain written permission from the publisher to use the content in your JBCD paper. Please do not include any content in your JBCD paper which you do not have rights to use, and always give proper attribution.
# If any relevant accompanying data is submitted to repositories with stated licensing policies, the policies should not be more restrictive than CC BY.
# JBCD reserves the right to remove any photos, captures, images, figures, tables, illustrations, audio and video files, and the like, from any paper, whether before or after publication, if we have reason to believe that the content was included in your paper without permission from the owner of the content.