北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2020, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (6): 1112-1116. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.06.021

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

以苄索氯胺和异丙醇为主要有效成分的消毒剂对牙科印模精度的影响

徐迪,魏冬豪,张亚池,邸萍(),林野   

  1. 北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院,种植科 国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心 口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室 口腔数字医学北京市重点实验室,北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2020-02-12 出版日期:2020-12-18 发布日期:2020-12-13
  • 通讯作者: 邸萍 E-mail:diping@bjmu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    首都卫生发展科研专项(2018-2-4102)

Effect of disinfectant with benzethon chloramine and isopropanol as main active ingredients on the accuracy of dental impression

Di XU,Dong-hao WEI,Ya-chi ZHANG,Ping DI(),Ye LIN   

  1. Department of Oral Implatology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2020-02-12 Online:2020-12-18 Published:2020-12-13
  • Contact: Ping DI E-mail:diping@bjmu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    Capital Health Research and Development Special Project(2018-2-4102)

摘要:

目的:探究以苄素氯胺和异丙醇为主要有效成分的消毒剂(Cavicide)对于牙科印模精度的影响。方法:体外试验评价Cavicide消毒剂对藻酸盐、聚醚橡胶和硅橡胶3种印模材料消毒后对印模精度的影响。应用高精度模型扫描仪(IScan D103i, Imetric)将标准模型数字化,使用藻酸盐、聚醚橡胶和硅橡胶材料分别制取标准模型的印模各30个,并将每种印模材料的30个印模随机平均分为3组,每组10个印模。在印模制取完成后,3组分别采用仅清水冲洗15 s(空白对照组,BC组)、2%(质量分数)戊二醛溶液浸泡30 min(戊二醛组,GD组)、Cavicide溶液表面喷洒5 min(Cavicide组,CC组)。采用模型扫描仪扫描印模,获得印模的数字化模型。在三维分析软件中,将印模扫描图像与标准模型的数字化模型进行配准,采用RMS作为评价印模与标准模型间偏差的参数。采用单因素方差分析比较3组间偏差,保存偏差的色谱图进行可视化分析。结果:聚醚橡胶及硅橡胶印模材料,3组间差异均无统计学意义(P=0.933,P=0.827);藻酸盐印模材料,GD组与BC组、GD组与CC组间差异均具有统计学意义(GD与 BC,P=0.001,GD与CC,P=0.002), BC组与CC组间差异无统计学意义(P=0.854)。结论:Cavicide喷洒消毒对聚醚橡胶、硅橡胶和藻酸盐印模的精度均未见影响。

关键词: 牙科印模, 印模消毒剂, 精度, 三维

Abstract:

Objective: To assess the effect of disinfectant (Cavicide) with benzethon chloramine and isopropanol as main active ingredients disinfectant on dental impression accuracy. Methods: The effect of Cavicide on three impression materials (alginate, polyether and vinylpolysiloxane) were assessed using a standard model. The standard model was digitized by an extraoral scanner (IScan D103i, Imetric). For each kind of impression materials, thirty impressions were taken following the manufactures’ instruction in the same conditions. Subsequently, the impressions were randomly divided into three groups, with ten impressions in each group. After the impression taking was completed, the three groups underwent pure water rinse for 1 min (blank control, BC), 2% glutaraldehyde solution immersion disinfection for 30 min (glutaraldehyde, GD), and Cavicide solution spray disinfection for 5 min (Cavicide, CC), respectively. All the impressions were digitized by the extraoral scanner (IScan D103i, Imetric) after disinfection and exported to a dedicated three-dimensional analysis software (Geomagic Qualify 2014, Geomagic, USA). In the software, the digital models of the impressions were trimmed to teeth and then superimposed with the digitized standard model via best-fit alignment. Root mean square (RMS) was used to evaluate the deviations between the impression and the standard model. The deviation in the anterior and posterior regions was evaluated respectively. One-way ANOVA test and the LSD post-hoc test were used to compare the deviations between the three groups (P <0.05). The color map of each superimposition was saved for visual analysis. Results: For the polyether and vinylpolysiloxane materials, the difference between the three groups was not statistically significant (P=0.933, P=0.827). For the alginate material, the difference in posterior region between group GD and group BC, as well as group GD and group CC were statistically significant (GD vs. BC, P=0.001; GD vs. CC, P=0.002), while the difference between group BC and group CC was not statistically significant (P=0.854). The visual analysis showed an obvious deviation in the buccal-lingual direction in group GD. Conclusion: Disinfectant (Cavicide) with benzethon chloramine and isopropanol as main active ingredients using spray disinfection has no effect on the accuracy of the alginate, polyether and vinylpolysiloxane impressions.

Key words: Dental impression, Disinfection, Accuracy, Three-dimensional

中图分类号: 

  • R783

图1

标准模型的牙合面观(A)与唇面观(B)"

图2

数字化的标准模型"

表1

前牙区印模与标准参考模型间RMS偏差(x-±s)"

Group BC GD CC P value
VSE 21.6±4.9 20.4±6.9 24.1±3.7 0.220
POE 28.7±10.3 31.2±9.4 30.9±11.4 0.740
ALG 40.5±21.6 47.9±23.0 42.4±25.1 0.703

表2

后牙区印模与标准参考模型间RMS偏差(x-±s)"

Group BC GD CC P value
VSE 27.1±6.7 29.2±10.0 26.4±7.7 0.733
POE 43.0±20.9 40.2±24.2 45.4±19.4 0.827
ALG 43.3±23.2 60.9±20.4 47.2±21.4 0.037

图3

前牙区各组印模与标准模型间典型偏差分布模式(切端观)"

图4

后牙区各组印模与标准模型间典型偏差分布模式(牙合面观)"

图5

后牙区各组藻酸盐印模与标准模型间典型偏差分布模式(颊侧观)"

[1] Alzain S. Effect of chemical, microwave irradiation, steam autoclave, ultraviolet light radiation, ozone and electrolyzed oxidizing water disinfection on properties of impression materials: a systematic review and meta-analysis study[J]. Saudi Dent J, 2020,32(4):161-170.
doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.12.003 pmid: 32405219
[2] Sehulster L, Chinn RY. Guidelines for environmental infection control in health-care facilities. recommendations of CDC and the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee (HICPAC)[J]. MMWR Recomm Rep, 2003,52(10):1-42.
[3] 于明红, 姚美令, 韩晓鹏, 等. 卡瓦液Cavicide对口腔种植聚醚印模消毒效果的研究[J]. 中国口腔种植学杂志, 2016,21(3):111-112.
[4] 马旭东, 张颖, 盛美春, 等. 一种口腔印模专用消毒剂对乙肝病毒活性及免疫原性的影响[J]. 中国消毒学杂志, 2017,34(7):628-630.
[5] Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, et al. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015,26(6):715-719.
doi: 10.1111/clr.12375 pmid: 24720423
[6] de Villaumbrosia G, Martinez-Rus PF, Garcia-Orejas A, et al. In vitro comparison of the accuracy (trueness and precision) of six extraoral dental scanners with different scanning technologies[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2016,116(4):543-550.
pmid: 27112413
[7] Luthardt RG, Loos R, Quaas S. Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression[J]. Int J Comput Dent, 2005,8(4):283-294.
pmid: 16689029
[8] Jagger DC, Vowles RW, McNally L, et al. The effect of a range of disinfectants on the dimensional accuracy and stability of some impression materials[J]. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent, 2007,15(1):23-28.
pmid: 17378455
[9] 武红梅, 李长春, 江浩, 等. 不同消毒剂消毒口腔印模效果检测及其对印模尺寸稳定性的影响[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2017,21(2):171-176.
[10] 陆金星, 陈亚明, 章非敏, 等. 不同消毒方法对口腔琼脂藻酸钾印模精度的影响[J]. 护理学杂志, 2004,19(24):3-4.
[11] Ulgey M, Gorler O, Yesilyurt G. Importance of disinfection time and procedure with different alginate impression products to reduce dimensional instability[J]. Niger J Clin Pract, 2020,23(3):284-290.
doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_456_19 pmid: 32134024
[12] 陈树国, 李磊, 李长明, 等. 浸泡消毒藻酸钾印模对模型尺寸稳定性的影响[J]. 现代口腔医学杂志, 2006,20(6):591-593.
[13] Balkenhol M, Ferger P, Wostmann B. Dimensional accuracy of 2-stage putty-wash impressions: influence of impression trays and viscosity[J]. Int J Prosthodont, 2007,20(6):573-575.
pmid: 18069363
[14] Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions: an in vitro study[J]. Int J Comput Dent, 2011,14(1):11-21.
pmid: 21657122
[1] 刘思民,赵一姣,王晓燕,王祖华. 动态导航下不同深度环钻定位精确度的体外评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54(1): 146-152.
[2] 邱淑婷,朱玉佳,王时敏,王飞龙,叶红强,赵一姣,刘云松,王勇,周永胜. 姿势微笑位口唇对称参考平面的数字化构建及初步应用验证[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54(1): 193-199.
[3] 王鹃,尉华杰,孙井德,邱立新. 预成刚性连接杆用于无牙颌种植即刻印模制取的应用评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2022, 54(1): 187-192.
[4] 杨刚,胡文杰,曹洁,柳登高. 牙周健康的上颌前牙唇侧嵴顶上牙龈的三维形态分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(5): 990-994.
[5] 邵振兴,宋庆法,赵宇晴,崔国庆. 一种结合线袢固定的关节镜下“嵌入式”喙突移位术:手术技术及术后影像学分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(5): 896-901.
[6] 李新飞, 彭意吉, 余霄腾, 熊盛炜, 程嗣达, 丁光璞, 杨昆霖, 唐琦, 米悦, 吴静云, 张鹏, 谢家馨, 郝瀚, 王鹤, 邱建星, 杨建, 李学松, 周利群. 肾部分切除术前CT三维可视化评估标准的初步探究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(3): 613-622.
[7] 陈迪,徐翔宇,汪明睿,李芮,臧根奥,张悦,钱浩楠,闫光荣,范田园. 熔融沉积成型3D打印盐酸维拉帕米胃漂浮制剂的制备与体外评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(2): 348-354.
[8] 黄新瑞,李莎,高嵩. 冷冻电镜成像中噪声的滤波方法进展[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(2): 425-433.
[9] 穆海丽,田福聪,王晓燕,高学军. 玻璃体和通用型复合树脂耐磨性的临床对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 120-125.
[10] 岳兆国,张海东,杨静文,侯建霞. 数字化评估CAD/CAM个性化基台与成品基台影响粘接剂残留的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 69-75.
[11] 徐啸翔,曹烨,赵一姣,贾璐,谢秋菲. 数字化个齿托盘制取下颌全牙列全冠预备体印模的体外评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 54-61.
[12] 国丹妮,潘韶霞,衡墨笛,屈健,魏秀霞,周永胜. 应用于无牙颌种植修复设计的三维面部扫描配准方法的对比[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 83-87.
[13] 李思雨,段雪飞,曹烨. 应用超声器械改善预备体肩台的效果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(1): 88-94.
[14] 邱天成,刘筱菁,薛竹林,李自力. 基于三维动态照相机的正常人面部表情可重复性研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(6): 1107-1111.
[15] 唐祖南,Hui Yuh Soh,胡耒豪,于尧,章文博,彭歆. 混合现实技术在口腔颌面部肿瘤手术中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(6): 1124-1129.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 田增民, 陈涛, Nanbert ZHONG, 李志超, 尹丰, 刘爽. 神经干细胞移植治疗遗传性小脑萎缩的临床研究(英文稿)[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(4): 456 -458 .
[2] 卢恬, 朱晓辉, 柳世庆, 郑杰, 邱晓彦. 白细胞介素2促进宫颈癌细胞系HeLaS3免疫球蛋白G的表达[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(2): 158 -161 .
[3] 袁惠燕, 张苑, 范田园. 离子交换型栓塞微球及其载平阳霉素的制备与性质研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(2): 217 -220 .
[4] 徐莉, 孟焕新, 张立, 陈智滨, 冯向辉, 释栋. 侵袭性牙周炎患者血清中抗牙龈卟啉单胞菌的IgG抗体水平的研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(1): 52 -55 .
[5] 董稳, 刘瑞昌, 刘克英, 关明, 杨旭东. 氯诺昔康和舒芬太尼用于颌面外科术后自控静脉镇痛的比较[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(1): 109 -111 .
[6] 祁琨, 邓芙蓉, 郭新彪. 纳米二氧化钛颗粒对人肺成纤维细胞缝隙连接通讯的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(3): 297 -301 .
[7] 李伟军, 邢晓芳, 曲立科, 孟麟, 寿成超. PRL-3基因C104S位点突变体和CAAX缺失体的构建及表达[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(5): 516 -520 .
[8] 丰雷, 王玉凤, 曹庆久. 哌甲酯对注意缺陷多动障碍儿童平衡功能影响的开放性研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 304 -309 .
[9] 刘津, 王玉凤. 父母培训对共患对立违抗性障碍的注意缺陷多动障碍的作用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 310 -314 .
[10] 汪毅, 刘粹, 王玉凤. 社会技能训练对有行为问题儿童影响的随机对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 315 -318 .