Comparative evaluation of the effect of electrolyzed oxidizing water on surface detail reproduction, dimensional stability and Surface texture of poly vinyl siloxane impressions

Abstract

Aim:The aim of this in vitro study was to comparatively evaluate the effect of chemical disinfectants on the surface detail reproduction, dimensional stability and surface texture of polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions.Materials and Methods:The impressions were then divided into five groups (fifteen samples per group) and subjected to a ten minutes immersion with 2% glutaraldehyde (Group I), 1% sodium hypochlorite (Group II), freshly prepared electrolyzed oxidizing water (EOW) with different pH values - acidic (Group III), alkali (Group IV) and neutral (Group V). The samples were examined pre and post-immersion under visual observation for surface detail reproduction, travelling microscope for measurement of dimensional stability and surface profilometer (3D) for evaluation of surface texture. A standardized master die was fabricated and seventy-five PVS test samples were made. The samples were subjected to immersion disinfection and studied for surface detail reproduction, dimensional stability and surface texture. Post-hoc test, paired t test and ANOVA were used to analyze dimensional stability statistically both within and between the test groups.Results:The surface detail reproduction was satisfactory with both pre and post-immersion test samples. A statistically significant dimensional change was observed post-immersion in Groups II, III and V test samples and a statistically insignificant dimensional change was observed in Groups I and IV test samples. There was a negligible change in surface texture post-immersion in Groups I, III, IV and V test samples with a slight increase in surface roughness post-immersion in Group II samples.Conclusion:In this study, all the test disinfectants produced satisfactory surface detail reproduction on Polyvinyl siloxane impressions. 2% glutaraldehyde and electrolyzed oxidizing water (alkali) have resulted in statistically insignificant dimensional change, while 1% sodium hypochlorite, electrolyzed oxidizing water (acidic) and electrolyzed oxidizing water (neutral) have resulted in statistically significant dimensional changes. All the test disinfectants except 1% sodium hypochlorite showed a reduction in surface roughness (Ra) values.

Effects of Various Disinfection Methods on the Material Properties of Silicone Dental Impressions of Different Types and Viscosities

“…Future research on impression materials should analyze the influence of disinfection on their other properties, since it has been shown that some of these (e.g., surface roughness) can be significantly affected, particularly by chemical disinfectants [45,46]. Moreover, although our study applied a carefully designed methodology, simulating most of the oral conditions such as temperature and moisture, there is a need for more studies to confirm the lack of adverse effects of the proposed methods of disinfection.…”

Electrolysed oxidising water as a multi‐purpose biocide in dental healthcare—A scoping review

“…Fourteen reports 107,109–112,128,157–164 investigated the effects of EOW on dental biomaterial properties (Table 3, Table S1). One study 62 reported on the rusting of carbon steel burs immersed in different EOW solutions (acidic, moderately acidic and neutral pH) at [HOCl] >100 mg/L.…”

“…Post‐immersion effects of rinsing times, EOW concentration, modes of application and type of EOW on impression materials, 107,161,164 and gypsum samples 107 have been measured either after direct contact or on samples obtained after rinsing hydrocolloid impressions with EOW 158,160 . The effect of rinsing time with POU acidic EOW on the surface roughness of hydrocolloid (irreversible, IRH; reversible, RH) impressions and surface hardness (scratch resistance) of resultant stone samples has been investigated 158 .…”

“…The dimensional deviations caused by EOW on IRH, polyvinyl silicone (PVS), condensation silicone, polyether, gypsum and on stone samples from IRH impressions have also been studied 107,160,161 . Surface detail reproduction and roughness of PVS, IRH and gypsum samples following exposure to RTU EOWs at acidic, neutral and basic pH have been reported 107,164 …”

“…Additionally, there is a lack of data on the change in EOW properties with storage; this is particularly important for RTU EOW (Table S2). The time since manufacture and pre‐test storage conditions of RTU EOW on study outcomes were reported in only 2 of the 27 reports 128,164 . Storage‐related investigations are sparse in general healthcare 166 and in dental healthcare 57–60,62 .…”