World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2022 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Effect of Disinfectants on Dimensional Stability of Two Elastomeric Impression Materials: An In Vitro Study

Keywords : Dimensional stability, Disinfectant, Elastomeric materials, Impression

Citation Information : Effect of Disinfectants on Dimensional Stability of Two Elastomeric Impression Materials: An In Vitro Study. World J Dent 2022; 13 (5):489-492.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2068

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 22-07-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The aim of the current research was to evaluate the results of two different disinfectants on the dimensional stability of two elastomeric impression materials. Materials and methods: A total of 120 samples were prepared in the present study. In accordance with the American Dental Association (ADA) specification number 19, a uniform stainless steel master die was constructed. In the current research, Imprint™ impression materials such as vinyl polysiloxanes (VPS) as well as a polyethers (PE), Impregum™, were used and manipulated as per the manufacturer's recommendations. To accomplish disinfection, 60 samples of either material were procured and allocated at random to one of the three groups: control group, 2% glutaraldehyde (GA) group, and 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) group. A stereomicroscope with 20× magnifying power was employed in the evaluation of the dimensional stability along with the aid of image investigation software. Results: In VPS impression material, most dimension-related changes were noted with control group at 0.80 ± 0.02 in pursuit by 2% GA use at 0.43 ± 0.08. The lowest changes in the dimensions were noted with 5.25% NaOCl use at 0.36 ± 0.01. In PE impression material, most dimension-related changes were noted with control group at 0.84 ± 0.09 in pursuit by 2% GA use at 0.49 ± 0.05. The lowest changes in the dimensions were noted with the use of 5.25% NaOCl group at 0.43 ± 0.05. The differences amid the groups using ANOVA were found to be statistically significant with a p <0.001. Conclusion: The results of this research indicate that either of the two elastomeric impression supplies that is VPS and PE showed little dimensional changes when subjected to immersion in two different disinfectants. Prolonged storage of samples disinfected with 5.25% hypochlorite and 2% GA may be utilized in the clinical set-up as the ensuing dimensional changes that result are quite less. Clinical significance: Infection control has raised a significant alarm for the dental practitioner lately due to increasing communicable diseases. A route of possible infection could be through dental impressions that on being taken out of the mouth get laced with microbes present in the patient's saliva as well as blood. Therefore, it is necessary to identify an appropriate disinfectant that would have lowest unfavorable effect on the dimensional exactness of elastomeric impression materials.

PDF Share
  1. Silva SM, Salvador MC. Effect of the disinfection technique on the linear dimensional stability of dental impression materials. J Appl Oral Sci 2004;12(3):244–9. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572004000300016
  2. Thota KK, Jasthi S, Ravuri R, et al. A comparative evaluation of the dimensional stability of three different elastomeric impression materials after autoclaving–an in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8(10):ZC48–ZC50. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/9768.5036
  3. Kohn WG, Collins AS, Cleveland JL, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guidelines for infection control in dental health-care settings. MMWR Recomm Rep 2003;52(17):1–61. PMID: 14685139.
  4. Demajo JK, Cassar V, Farrugia C, et al. Effectiveness of disinfectants on antimicrobial and physical properties of dental impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 2016;29(1):63–67. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4358
  5. Sinobad T, Obradović-Djuricić K, Nikolić Z, et al. The effect of disinfectants on dimensional stability of addition and condensation silicone impressions. Vojnosanit Pregl 2014;71(3):251–258. DOI: 10.2298/vsp120709037s
  6. Sree Lakshmi SB, Somasundram J, Geetha RV. Disinfection of impression material–a review. Eur J Mol Clin Med 2020;07(1): 978–985. https://ejmcm.com/article_2264.html
  7. Reports of Councils and Bureaus. ADA specification No 19 for non- aqueous elastomeric impression materials. JADA 1977;94(4):733–741. PMID: 6943234.
  8. Surendra GP, Anjum A, Satish Babu CL, et al. Evaluation of dimensional stability of autoclavable elastomeric impression material. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2011;11(1):63–66. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-011-0061-1
  9. Naumovski B, Kapushevska B. Dimensional stability and accuracy of silicone–based impression materials using different impression techniques–a literature review. Prilozi (Makedon Akad Nauk Umet Odd Med Nauki) 2017;38(2):131–138. DOI: 10.1515/prilozi- 2017-0031
  10. Kronstrom MH, Johnson GH, Hompesch RW. Accuracy of a new ring-opening metathesis elastomeric dental impression material with spray and immersion disinfection. J Prosthet Dent 2010;103(1):23–30. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60210-9
  11. Adabo GL, Zanarotti E, Fonseca RG, et al. Effect of disinfectant agents on dimensional stability of elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81(5):621–624. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70219-2
  12. Tullner JB, Commette JA, Moon PC. Linear dimensional changes in dental impressions after immersion in disinfectant solutions. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60(6):725–728. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(88)90407-6
  13. Lucas MG, Arioli-Filho JN, Nogueira SS, et al. Effect of incorporation of disinfectant solutions on setting time, linear dimensional stability, and detail reproduction in dental stone casts. J Prosthodont 2009;18(6):521–526. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00466.x
  14. Singh R, Raghavari R, Rupesh PL. Effect of four disinfectants on the dimensional accuracy of polyether, addition silicone and condensation silicone impression materials on the resultant gypsum casts - an in vitro study. JNDA 2013;13(1):45–51.
  15. Shah S, Sundaram G, Bartlett D, et al. The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimposition software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques. J Dent 2004;32(8):653–658. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2004.07.005
  16. Faria AC, Rodrigues RC, Macedo AP, et al. Accuracy of stone casts obtained by different impression materials. Braz Oral Res 2008;22(4):293–298. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242008000400002
  17. Petrie CS, Walker MP, O'mahony AM, et al. Dimensional accuracy and surface detail reproduction of two hydrophilic vinyl polysiloxane impression materials tested under dry, moist, and wet conditions. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90(4):365–372. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(03)00515-8
  18. Martins F, Branco P, Reis J, et al. Dimensional stability of two impression materials after a 6-month storage period. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand 2017;3(1):84–91. DOI: 10.1080/23337931. 2017.1401933
  19. Chen SY, Liang WM, Chen FN. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastomeric impression materials. J Dent 2004;32(8):603–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2004.04.002
  20. Nassar U, Oko A, Adeeb S, et al. An in vitro study on the dimensional stability of a vinyl polyether silicone impression material over a prolonged storage period. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109(3):172–178. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60038-4
  21. Walker MP, Petrie CS, Haj-Ali R, et al. Moisture effect on polyether and polyvinylsiloxane dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction. J Prosthodont 2005;14(3):158–163. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2005.04024.x
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.