Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Comparison of Disinfectant Effect of Sodium Hypochlorite 0.5%, Deconex and Surfosept on Alginate Impressions

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Medicine, School of Dentistry, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

2 Students Research Committee, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran

3 Dentist, Rafsanjan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Infection control has always been one of the most important issues in dentistry. Dentists are exposed to harmful microorganisms originating from the blood and saliva. In prosthodontics contaminated impression materials are in contact with the laboratory personnel. Therefore it is absolutely necessary to establish a method for disinfecting these materials. The aim of this study was to survey the effect of three different disinfectants on alginate disks using the immersion method.
Materials and Methods: The disinfecting efficacy of 0.5% sodium hypochlorite, Deconex and Surfosept was evaluated in vitro by immersion method using 240 alginate disks contaminated with 3 microorganisms. Eighty alginate disks were prepared for each microorganism. The disks were immersed in the disinfecting solution. Cultures were prepared and colony counts were determined after 24 hours. Data were analyzed with chi-squared test and logistic regression using SPSS 20 (α = 0.05).
Results: The antimicrobial activities of 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solution, Deconex and Surfosept were significant (p value < 0.001). Surfosept exhibited the greatest effect on Staphylococcus aureus (mean colony count of 20.05 ± 3.28) while Deconex exhibited the greatest effect on Pseudomonas aeruginosa (mean colony count of 31.15 ± 4.27) and Candida albicans (mean colony count of 7.55 ± 2.37).
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solution in all the three cases was the least effective. In the case of Candida albicans and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the greatest effects were recorded with Deconex and for Staphylococcus aureus with Surfosept.
Key words: Alginate, Disinfection, Immersion

1. Al-Jabrah O, Al-Shumailan Y, Al-Rashdan M. Antimicrobial effect of 4 disinfectants on alginate, polyether, and polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20(3): 299-307.
2. Taylor RL, Wright PS, Maryan C. Disinfection procedures: their effect on the dimensional accuracy and surface quality of irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials and gypsum casts. Dent Mater J 2002; 18(2): 103-10.
3. Internationale FD. A revision of technical report No. 10. Recommendations for hygiene in dental practice including treatment of infectious patients. Int Dent J 1987; 37:5-142.
4. Murata H, Kawamura M, Hamada T, Chimori H, Nicawa H. Physical properties and compatibility with dental stones of current alginate impression materials. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31(11): 1115-22.
5. Al-Omari WM, Jones JC, Hart P. A microbiological investigation following the disinfection of alginate and addition cured silicone rubber impression materials. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 1998; 6(3): 97-101.
6. Owell GL, Runnells RD, Saxon BA, Whisenant BK. The presence and identification of organisms transmitted to dental laboratories. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64(2): 235-7.
7. Pang SK, Millar BJ. Cross infection control of impressions: a questionnaire survey of practice among private dentists in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Dent J. 2006; 3: 89-93.
8. Greenberg M, Glick M, Ship JA. Burket's oral medicine. 11th ed. Hamilton, ON: BC Deeker Inc; 2015.
9. Farhad AR, Havaei A, Farhad SZ, Poursina F. The bacteriologic evaluation of antibacterial effect: Normal saline 5.25% and 0.5% Sodium hypochlorite and Calcium hydroxide. J Res Med Sci 2000; 5(3): 245-9.
10. Ringel AM, Patterson SS, Newton CW, Miller CH, Mulhern JM. In vitro evaluation of chlorhexidine gluconate solution and sodium hypochlorie solution as root canal irrigants. J Endod 1982; 8(5): 200-4.
11. Mohammadi Sichani M, Bahreini B, Hasanzadeh A, Parsafar S. Effectiveness of 5% and 10% deconex53plus in rapid decontamination of gutta-percha cones. Tabibe Shargh 2008; 10(2): 97-105.
12. Saburi A, Fallah F, Dastgiri M .Evaluation of antimicrobial effect of micro 10 and deconex 53plus on dental instruments. J Islamic Dental Association 2006; 18(4): 49-55. [In Persian].
13. Badrian H, Ghasemi E, Khalighinejad N, Hosseini N. The effect of three different disinfection materials on alginate impression by spray method. ISRN Dent 2012; 2012: 695151.
14. Ghahremanloo A, Sadeghian A, Bidi R. Effect of three different disinfection materials on alginate disc by immersion and spray methods. J Babol Univ Med Sci 2011; 13(3): 42-9.
15. Farzin M, Bahrani F, Kohanteb J, Khosravani M. Comparison of 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite disinfection alginate impression with the flotation method and spray. Shiraz Univ Dent J 2005; 6(1-2): 82-90. [In Persian].
16. Egusa H, Watamoto T, Abe K, Kobayashi M, Kaneda Y, Ashida S, et al. An analysis of the persistent presence of opportunistic pathogens on patient-derived dental impressions and gypsum casts. Int J Prosthodont 2008; 21(1): 62-8.
17. Jamilian A, Parhiz H, Rastegariyan H, Nobakht S. Efficacy of three disinfectants on alginate impressions. Iranian Journal of Orthodontics 2011; 6(1): 32-7. [In Persian].
18. Hemmati MA, Felegari M, Vakili R, Asgari MS, Kermanjani A, Norouzi M. Antimicrobial effects of SeptiTurbo, Deconex (Solarsept) and 0.525% sodium hypochlorite spray on alginate impression materials. J Dent Sch Shahid Beheshti Univ Med Sci 2017; 35(3): 81-3.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 15, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
March 2019
Pages 66-74