Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 16, 2026
Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Accuracy of a new ring-opening metathesis elastomeric dental impression material with spray and immersion
Mats H Kronström1, Glen H Johnson, Richard W Hompesch
1Associate Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-7456, USA. mk33@u.washington.edu
Statement Of Problem:
A new elastomeric impression material has been formulated with a ring-opening metathesis chemistry. In addition to other properties of clinical significance, the impression accuracy must be confirmed.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the new elastomeric impression material with vinyl polysiloxane and polyether following both spray and immersion disinfection.
Material And Methods:
Impressions of a modified dentoform with a stainless steel crown preparation in the lower right quadrant were made, and type IV gypsum working casts and dies were formed. Anteroposterior (AP), cross-arch (CA), buccolingual (BL), mesiodistal (MD), occlusogingivobuccal (OGB), and occlusogingivolingual (OGL) dimensions were measured using a microscope. Working cast and die dimensions were compared to those of the master model. The impression materials were a newly formulated, ring-opening metathesis-polymerization impression material (ROMP Cartridge Tray and ROMP Volume Wash), vinyl polysiloxane (VPS, Aquasil Ultra Monophase/LV), and a polyether (PE, Impregum Penta Soft/Permadyne Garant L). Fifteen impressions with each material were made, of which 5 were disinfected by spray for 10 minutes (CaviCide), 5 were disinfected by immersion for 90 minutes (ProCide D), and 5 were not disinfected. There were significant cross-product interactions with a 2-way ANOVA, so a 1-way ANOVA and Dunnett's T3 multiple comparison test were used to compare the dimensional changes of the 3 impression materials, by disinfection status and for each location (alpha=.05).
Results:
For ROMP, there were no significant differences from the master, for any dimension, when comparing the control and 2 disinfectant conditions. No significant differences were detected among the 3 impression materials for CA, BL, and MD. The working die dimensions of OGB and OGL for VPS with immersion disinfection were significantly shorter than with PE and ROMP (P<.05). Overall, the AP dimension was more accurate than CA, and the BL of working dies was 0.040 mm greater in diameter than MD.
Conclusions:
The accuracy of gypsum working casts and working dies from the new and 2 existing types of impression material were similar, for both spray and immersion disinfection. Judicious application of a die spacer can compensate for the small differences observed. VPS may require additional laboratory accommodation to compensate for a shorter working die.
