Effect of a new disinfectant solution on the dimensional stability and contact angle of elastomeric impression materials
MetadataShow full item record
It is common practice to disinfect dental impressions before sending them to a dental laboratory. Many types of disinfectant solutions have been used in dental practice for this purpose, and previous studies have reported the effects of disinfectant solutions on impression materials. This study evaluated the effect of a 7.5% hydrogen-peroxide disinfectant solution on the dimensional stability and contact angle of elastomeric impression materials and compared the results to those obtained with 2 other commonly used solutions. Materials and Methods: Six types of elastomeric impression materials were used: (1) Aquasil Monophase-Medium (Denstply); (2) Express (3M/ESPE); (3) Imprint (3M/ESPE); (4) ImpregumPenta (3M/ESPE); (5) Xantopren-Light (Heraeus-Kulzer); and (6) Xantopren-Medium (Heraeus-Kulzer). The different treatments included: (1) 7.5% hydrogen peroxide (Sporox; Reckitt & Colman) (2) 3.4% Glutaraldehyde (Cidex Plus; Johnson & Johnson); (3) 17.2% Isopropanol (Cavicide; Kerr/Metrex); and (4) water (Control). This study was divided in 2 different experiments. For experiment I (effects of disinfectant solutions on dimensional stability) a standardized stainless steel die ADA specification No. 19 was used. The distances between lines were measured with a traveling stage microscope before and after treatment with the disinfectant solutions. In experiment II (effects of disinfectant solutions on contact angle) the contact angle of a water drop placed on the surface of each impression material was measured before and after disinfection. A close-up video camera with 5-[mu]m resolution (Javelin JV6000, USA), connected to a computer with a video capture board, was used to capture the image. Statistical analysis for experiment I was performed by using the equivalence tests of the differences between the measurements made before and after treatment with various disinfectants. For experiment II, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare contact angles between disinfectants and control. Tukey’s multiple comparisons procedure was performed to compare differences between groups. Results and Conclusions: For experiment I, the new disinfectant solution (Sporox) investigated had no adverse effect on the dimensional stability of any of the impression materials tested (p[greater than]0.05). Statistically significant dimensional changes were recorded with most of the treatments for the 2 condensation silicones (p[less than]0.05). Impregum-Penta material showed statistically significant dimensional changes when treated with Cidex-Plus and Cavicide solutions (p[less than]0.05). The 3 groups of addition silicone material did not show any statistically significant changes (p[greater than]0.05). Experiment II showed significant differences in the contact angles among most of the impression materials. Aquasil-Monophase material was the only impression material that displayed no significant changes in the contact angles before and after treatment (p=0.67).
PLEASE NOTE: This work is protected by copyright. Downloading is restricted to the BU community: please click Download and log in with a valid BU account to access. If you are the author of this work and would like to make it publicly available, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.Thesis (M.S.D.)--Boston University, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, 2004 (Prosthodontics).x, 70 leavesIncludes bibliography (leaves 65-70).