Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Dental Sciences, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, SIMATS, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Indian J Dent Res. 2022 Jan-Mar;33(1):30-36. doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_623_20.
The aims of this study were to compare the efficacy of two proven chemical disinfectants, glutaraldehyde and povidone iodine on dental impression and models by determining the reduction in the microbial load, and to compare changes in the physical properties of the models after adding the disinfectants.
Irreversible hydrocolloid upper impressions of 90 patients were made and divided into 3 groups of 30 samples each; Group A--Control group; Impressions were run under clean tap water before pouring the model. Group B--2% Glutaraldehyde sprayed on the impression and left in situ for 10 min before pouring the model. Group C -10 ml of (5%) povidone iodine incorporated into the gypsum before pouring the model. Models from all three groups were subjected to microbiological assessment at three different time intervals, T0--24 h, T1--1 month and T2--3 months of storage by comparing the colony forming units (CFUs) of bacteria and fungi. The compressive strength of 5 models from each group was also analyzed in Newton's/mm.
2% Glutaraldehyde proved more effective than povidone iodine after 24 h of storage (T1), however at the end of 1 month (T1) and 3 months (T2) the Povidone group showed the maximum disinfection. Both the disinfectants caused a reduction in the compressive strength of the model with the povidone iodine group showing the maximum reduction.
Although povidone iodine was the most effective disinfectant after 3 months, it showed a significant reduction in the compressive strength and caused discoloration of the model. 2% Glutaraldehyde proved to be the choice of disinfectant with minimal adverse effects.
本研究旨在比较两种已证实的化学消毒剂戊二醛和聚维酮碘对牙印模和模型的效果，通过确定微生物负荷的减少来比较，并且比较在添加消毒剂后模型的物理性质的变化。
对 90 名患者的不可逆转的水胶体上印模进行分组，每组 30 个样本；A 组为对照组；在浇注模型前，印模在清洁的自来水下运行。B 组在印模上喷涂 2%戊二醛，原位放置 10 分钟后浇注模型。C 组在浇注模型前将 10ml（5%）聚维酮碘加入石膏中。三组模型在三个不同的时间间隔（T0-24 小时，T1-1 个月和 T2-3 个月）进行微生物评估，通过比较细菌和真菌的菌落形成单位（CFU）来比较。还分析了每组 5 个模型的抗压强度。
2%戊二醛在 24 小时储存后（T1）比聚维酮碘更有效，但在 1 个月（T1）和 3 个月（T2）结束时，聚维酮组显示出最大的消毒效果。两种消毒剂都降低了模型的抗压强度，聚维酮碘组的降幅最大。
虽然聚维酮碘在 3 个月后是最有效的消毒剂，但它显示出显著降低抗压强度并导致模型变色。2%戊二醛被证明是一种选择，副作用最小。
