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

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.06.021

摘要/Abstract

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

徐迪,魏冬豪,张亚池,邸萍,林野. 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[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2020, 52(6): 1112-1116.

Di XU,Dong-hao WEI,Ya-chi ZHANG,Ping DI,Ye LIN. Effect of disinfectant with benzethon chloramine and isopropanol as main active ingredients on the accuracy of dental impression[J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2020, 52(6): 1112-1116.

图/表 7

图1

图2

表1

表2

图3

图4

图5

参考文献 14

[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

相关文章 15

[1]	温奥楠, 张晓会, 杨咏涛, 高梓翔, 李文博, 单珅瑶, 商相宜, 田淯文, 郭殊玮, 王艺蓁, 王勇, 赵一姣. 基于非刚性配准构建三维颜面微笑仿真序列数据的方法[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2026, 58(1): 139-144.
[2]	邵梁, 马雯洁, 陈莹, 丁茜, 张磊. 上颌切牙前伸和正中咬合接触解剖特征的数字化测量与分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2026, 58(1): 99-106.
[3]	宋凤岐, 徐心雨, 刘筱菁, 李自力. 上颌骨前部和整体顺时针旋转改善骨性Ⅲ类牙颌面畸形患者鼻旁凹陷的对比[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(5): 980-988.
[4]	肖宇嘉, 毛渤淳, 周彦恒. 姿势性微笑的三维形态学研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(5): 989-995.
[5]	钱锟, 刘亦洪. 基于直接法和间接法数字印模制作的高嵌体适合性评价的体外研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(3): 604-609.
[6]	仇师禹, 练洋, 康一帆, 张雷, 蔡义望, 单小峰, 蔡志刚. 基于下颌骨数据库和全连接神经网络的三维检索模型辅助下的下颌骨个性化重建[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(2): 360-368.
[7]	马丽娟, 腾雍辉, 王勇, 赵一姣, 张馨月, 秦庆钊, 尹东. 乳牙缺失数字化丝圈间隙保持器的三维有限元分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(2): 376-383.
[8]	朱玉佳, 沈华, 温奥楠, 高梓翔, 秦庆钊, 单珅瑶, 李文博, 傅湘玲, 赵一姣, 王勇. 三维颌面对称参考平面智能构建的深度学习算法[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(1): 113-120.
[9]	徐昕恺, 赵建江, 田素坤, 刘中宁, 赵晓一, 赵晓波, 江腾飞, 陈晓军, 马超, 孙玉春. 集成压缩气流系统扫描头辅助获取液体干扰表面三维数据精度评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(1): 121-127.
[10]	吴灵, 方嘉琨, 刘筱菁, 李自力, 李阳, 王晓霞. 基于牙颌面畸形患者三维颅面特征相似性度量模型的建立及评估[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(1): 128-135.
[11]	李虹, 马斐斐, 翁金龙, 杜阳, 吴彬彰, 孙凤. 口腔即刻种植时动态导航系统的种植精度分析[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(1): 85-90.
[12]	唐祖南,胡耒豪,陈震,于尧,章文博,彭歆. 增强现实技术在口腔颌面颈部解剖识别中的应用评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(3): 541-545.
[13]	吕梁,张铭津,温奧楠,赵一姣,王勇,李晶,杨庚辰,柳大为. 应用三维软组织空间线角模板法评价颏部对称性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 106-110.
[14]	毛渤淳,田雅婧,王雪东,李晶,周彦恒. 骨性Ⅱ类高角患者拔牙矫治前后的面部软硬组织变化[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 111-119.
[15]	凌晓彤,屈留洋,郑丹妮,杨静,闫雪冰,柳登高,高岩. 牙源性钙化囊肿与牙源性钙化上皮瘤的三维影像特点[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(1): 131-137.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

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

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