Table 2.

List of publication selected for this meta-analysis and systemic review along with respectively reported results for effect of disinfection on the dimensional accuracy of PVES impression material

Study	Material		Disinfectant composition		Disinfection method		Properties studied		Measurement specifications		Outcome		Limitations
Khatri et al. 2020 (19)	PVES EXA’lence (GC Dental Products Corp, Japan) light and heavy medium		Glutaraldehyde 2.45% (Johnson and Johnson, India)		Immersed for 15 min		Linear dimensional stability		Dimensional changes recorded with Digital Vernier calliper under a stereomicroscope, measured at 0 h		Dimensional changes were within clinically acceptable range		The impressions were made from standard dies which do not resemble oral conditions
			NaOCl 3.0% (Vishal, India)		Immersed for 15 min
Mikaeel and Mustafa 2019 (20)	VPES (material brand and viscosity information not provided)		NaOCl 5.25%		Sprayed for 15 s and then left for 10 min, Immersed for 10 min		Linear dimensional stability, surface details		USB digital microscope, changes recorded after 7 and 48 h of disinfection		No significant dimensional difference in PVES after 7 h but clinically significant changes after 48 h		In vitro conditions, different time for disinfection for NaOCl and Dettol as compared to Cavex Impersafe
			Dettol		Sprayed for 15 s and then left for 10 min, Immersed for 10 min
			Cavex Impersafe		Sprayed for 15 s and then left for 3 min, Immersed for 3 min
Mohd et al. 2021 (21)		VPES (Identium® (Kettenbach GmbH & Co. KG, Eschenburg, Germany), Medium body		Silosept® (Kettenbach GmbH & Co. KG, Eschenburg, Germany)		Immersed in disinfectant for 10 min, Rinse with water for 15 s		Linear dimensional stability		Dimensional changes recorded with Image Analyzer (Infinite Focus Real 3D Alicona), measured at 0 h		No significant Dimensional accuracy alterations for PVES		The dimensional accuracy of PVES was compared with PVS but not PE
Nassar et al. 2017 (22)	VPES EXA’lence (GC America Alsip, IL, USA). Heavy, light, and extra light consistencies with regular or fast set		Buffered Glutaraldehyde 2.5% (Metricide 28; Metricide Research, Orange, CA, USA)		Disinfected by immersion for 30 min under room temperature, rinsed for 15 s with water.		Linear dimensional stability		A milling machine. with an X and Y table and digital encoder with a resolution of 5 µ, aligned with a toolmaker microscope with 30X magnification. Measurements were taken at 0, 7 & 14 days.		No significant changes after 0 and 7 days while changes after 14 days were statistically significant.		Single disinfectant, disinfection duration of only one duration. Only VPES materials of different consistencies were compared, a better comparison would be with other impression materials like PE and PVS.
Nassar and Chow 2015(23)	VPES EXA’lence (lot number 1,103,211; GC America, Alsip, IL). Heavy body, fast set.		Buffered Glutaraldehyde 2.5% (Metricide 28; Metricide Research, Orange, CA, USA)		Immersed for 30 min at room temperature, rinsed with water for 15 s.		Linear dimensional stability, surface details		A milling machine. with an X and Y table and digital encoder with a resolution of 5 µ, aligned with a toolmaker microscope with 30X magnification. Measurements were taken at 0, 7 & 14 days.		The material remained stable over the period of 14 days. VPES showed more stability as compared to VPS.		In vitro conditions
Soganci et al. 2018 (24)	VPES EXA’lence (370 monophase, GC America, Alsip, IL, USA)		Glutaraldehyde 2.0% (Steranios, Anios Laboratoires, Hellemmes, France)		Immersed in disinfected for 10 min		3D dimensional stability		Dimensional changes recorded with 3D scanner (SmartOptics Activity 880, smart optics Sensortechnik, Bochum, Germany) at room temperature at 0 and 24 h after disinfection.		No significant effect on the dimensional accuracy of PVES		In vitro settings, the master model and conditions did not resemble the resiliency of oral tissues and saliva.
			NaOCl 5.25% (Aklar Kimya, Ankara, Turkey)		Immersed in disinfected for 10 min