The effect of Fit-checking material and various subsequent cleaning methods on the wettability of the dentin surface: an in vitro study


  • Jampana VVSN RAJU Vishnu Dental College
  • D Bheemalingeswar Rao Vishnu Dental College
  • MC Suresh Sajjan Vishnu Dental College
  • P Jitendra Babu AP Super Specialty Dental Clinic
  • AV Ramaraju Vishnu Dental College
  • YJB Manikyamba Vishnu Dental College



Silicone disclosing agents, Fit-checker, Wettability, Contact angle


Background: GC Fit-checker is a modified polyvinyl siloxane impression material exclusively used to check the internal fit and improve the marginal fit of indirect restorations. An unpolymerized organic film is known to be leftover on the bonding surfaces after the silicone disclosing procedure. Residual silicone film being hydrophobic may alter the wettability of the cement to the tooth/metal surface, thus having a detrimental effect on the bond strength and retention of the restoration.  

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the wetting of luting liquid (GIC) to tooth dentin surface after application of Fit-checker and evaluate the efficiency of various surface treatments in removing the residual silicone film.

Materials and Methods: Extracted human molars were mounted on the acrylic block, and the tooth occlusal surface was ground flat till the dentin exposure. All the specimens were assigned into five groups: Group 1: without application of Fit-checker (control group); Group 2: without any surface treatment after peeling off Fit-checker; Group 3: surface treatment with wet pumice; Group 4: 37% phosphoric acid treatment; Group 5: 10% polyacrylic acid treatment. Later, Type 1 Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) liquid drop was placed on the dentin and photographs were made horizontally using a standardized procedure. Contact angles were measured using AUTOCAD software. Obtained values were statistically analyzed using the One-way ANOVA test and Tukey’s Post hoc test. Samples of each group were examined using the scanning electron microscope.

Results: Statistically significant difference was observed among all the groups except between Group 4 and Group 2 (p > 0.05). SEM images of various groups showed a significant difference in roughness patterns.

Conclusion: Surface treatment with pumice and the rotary brush was an effective method among the three in cleaning the residual silicone film.

Author Biographies

Jampana VVSN RAJU, Vishnu Dental College

Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram.

D Bheemalingeswar Rao , Vishnu Dental College

Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

MC Suresh Sajjan, Vishnu Dental College

Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

P Jitendra Babu, AP Super Specialty Dental Clinic

Private Practitioner, AP Super Speciality Dental Clinic, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

AV Ramaraju, Vishnu Dental College

Professor, Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.

YJB Manikyamba, Vishnu Dental College

Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.


Sorensen JA. Improved seating of ceramic inlays with a silicone fit-checking medium. J Prosthet Dent. 1991; 65(5):646-9.

Anusavice KJ. Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials. 11th ed., W. B. Saunders Company. 2003: 295-350.

Rissin L, Wetreich G. Utilization of elastomeric impression materials to evaluate the accuracy of cast restorations prior to cementation. J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 49(4): 585-6.

Szep S, Schmid C, Weigl P, et al. Effect of silicone disclosing procedure on the shear bond strength of composite cements to ceramic restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89(1):60-5.

Yang B, Wolfart S, Scharnberg M, et al. Influence of contamination on zirconia ceramic bonding. J Dent Res. 2007; 86(8): 749-53.

White SN, Sorensen JA, Kang SK et al. Improved marginal seating of cast restorations using a silicone disclosing medium. Int J Prosthodont. 1991; 4(4): 323-6.

Hammad IA, Amir MA. The effect of two fit-indicating materials and various subsequent cleaning methods on the retention of simulated crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99: 46-53.

Klosa K, Walfart S, Lehmann F et al. The effect of storage conditions, contamination modes and cleaning procedures on the resin bond strength to lithium disilicate ceramic. J Adhes Dent. 2009; 11: 127-35.

Davis SH, Kelly JR, Campbell SD. Use of elastomeric material to improve the occlusal seat and marginal seal of cast restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62(3): 288-91.

Millstein PL, Ho JC, Naim W et al. Effect of a silicone fit-indicator on crown retention in vitro. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62(5):510-1.

Pohjola RM. Fit checker for all ceramic restorations. Oper Dent. 2003; 28: 346.

Quaas AC, Yang B, Kern M. Panavia F 2.0 bonding to contaminated zirconia ceramic after different cleaning procedures. Dent Mater. 2007; 23: 506-12.

Zhang S, Kocjan A, Lehmann F et al. Influence of contamination on resin bond strength to nano-structured alumina-coated zirconia ceramic. Eur J Oral Sci. 2010; 118: 396-403.

Jyothi M, Reddy V, Shetty J et al. Effect of fit checking materials and subsequent cleaning methods on the contact angle of luting agents–a pilot study. Trends in Prosthodontics and Dental Implantology. 2012; 3(2): 38-40.

Bowen RL, Eick JD, Henderson DA et al. Smear layer: removal and bonding consideration. Oper Dent. 1984; suppl. 3: 30 – 4.

Meryon SD, Tobias RS, Jakeman KJ. Smear removal agents: A quantitative study in vivo and in vitro. J Prosthet Dent. 1987; 57(2): 174-9.

Toledano M, Osorio R, Perdigao J et al. Effect of acid etching and collagen removal on dentin wettability and roughness. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999; 47:198–203.<198::AID-JBM9>3.0.CO;2-L

Tay FR, Smales RJ, Ngo H, et al. Effect of Different Conditioning Protocols on Adhesion of a GIC to Dentin. J Adesive Dent. 2001;3:153-67.

Banomyong D, Palamara JEA, Burrow MF, Messer HH. Effect of dentin conditioning on dentin permeability and micro-shear bond strength. Eur J Oral Sci. 2007; 115: 502–9.

Parihar N, Pilania M. SEM evaluation of effect of 37% phosphoric acid gel, 24% EDTA gel and 10% maleic acid gel on the enamel and dentin for 15 and 60 seconds: an in?vitro study. IDJSR. 2012;1(2):39-41.

Mauro SJ, Sundfeld RH, Bedran-Russo AKB, et al. Bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer to dentin: the effect of dentin surface treatment. J Minim Interv Dent. 2009; 2 (1):45-53.

Poggio C, Beltrami R, Scribante et al. Effect of different surface treatments on shear bond strength of glass-ionomer cements. Annali di Stomatologia. 2014;5(1):15-22.

Bagmar S, Jadhav S, Hegde V et al. A comparative evaluation of the efficiency of different acids for removal of smear layer after cavity preparation. An in vitro study. IJRANSS. 2013; 1(2): 5-12.

Gateva N, Gusyiska A, Stanimirov P, et al. Effect of etching time and acid concentration on micromorphological changes in dentin of both dentitions. J of IMAB. 2016; 22(2) ;1099-110.

Berry EA, Von der Lehr WN, Herrin HK. Dentin surface treatments for the removal of the smear layer: an SEM study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1987; 115: 65-7.

Hewlett, ER, Caputo AA, Wrobel DC. Glass ionomer bond strength and treatment of dentin with polyacrylic acid. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;68(6):767-72.

Shashirekha. G, Jena A, Hegde J. Bond strength of light activated glass ionomer with different conditioners on human dentin. IJSTR. 2012; 1(9):26-9.

Anne G, Manne P, Kadiyala KK, Chiramana S, Oliganti SHB, Boppana PP. A comparative study to evaluate retention of full metal crowns cemented with various luting agents with and without application of dentine conditioners: An in vitro study. J NTR Univ Health Sci. 2016;5: 29-33.






Original Articles