Share Page:

Volume 17 , Issue 1
January/February 2004

Pages 65–71

Effects of a Chemical Disinfectant on the Physical Properties of Dental Stones

B. Daniel Hall, DDS/Carlos A. Muñoz-Viveros, DDS, MSD/W. Patrick Naylor, DDS, MPH, MS/Jenny Sy, DDS, MSD

PMID: 15008235

Purpose: This study compared the effects of an antimicrobial agent (Asepto-Sol) on the physical properties of types III, IV, and V gypsum casts made from two types of impression materials. Materials and Methods: Selected physical properties of five gypsum-based dental stones (Prima-Rock, Ortho Stone, New Fujirock, Die-Keen, Microstone) and two resin-based dental stones (Resin-Rock, Instone) were evaluated using an addition silicone impression material (Reprosil) and an irreversible hydrocolloid (Jeltrate Plus). In group 1, Asepto-Sol solution replaced water as the gauging liquid for the seven dental stones. The mixed gypsum was poured directly onto impressions of two master dies using two impression materials. In group 2, impressions made with both impression materials were sprayed with the Asepto-Sol solution, left for 10 minutes, rinsed for 30 seconds with tap water, and poured with each dental stone mixed with deionized water. In group 3 (control), the gypsums were mixed with deionized water and the mixed stone was poured directly into impressions, with no exposure to Asepto-Sol. The physical properties evaluated for the gypsum specimens were linear dimensional change, detail reproduction, Knoop hardness, and transverse strength. Results: The linear dimensional stability, detail reproduction, and transverse strength tests were relatively unaffected by the use of Asepto-Sol, with few exceptions. Detail reproduction appeared to be least affected by Asepto-Sol, and changes in Knoop hardness were noted but results differed among the seven dental stones. However, New Fujirock was not ideally matched with Jeltrate Plus, and no stone specimens could be produced. Conclusion: Whether mixed with the gypsum powder or sprayed on impressions, Asepto-Sol solution did not adversely affect the physical properties of the dental stones tested. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:65–71.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc

IJP Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us