An Evaluation Of The Retention Property Between Cream Type And Strip Type Denture Adhesive With And Without Salivary Substitutes: An In Vitro Study
Background: Patients with xerostomia complain of not only dryness of mouth but also discomfort during routine normal oral functions like speaking and swallowing. This complain is worse in individuals wearing removable intraoral dental prosthesis. In such situations, when salivary flow decreases, denture adhesives and salivary substitutes are recommended; which aid in denture retention and improve patient comfort. Method: A total 150 samples were prepared using heat-cure acrylic resin of 30mm×30mm×5mm. All samples were equally divided in A,B,C,D,E groups, wherein Group A was control group with salivary substitutes. Group B was denture adhesive cream without salivary substitutes. Group C was denture adhesive cream with salivary substitutes. Group D was denture adhesive strips without salivary substitutes. Group E was denture adhesive strips with salivary substitutes. The retentive force was measured for all samples using universal testing machine. Results: Data was collected and statistical analysis was done by one-way ANOVA test followed by post hoc test. The significant difference was found between the retentive forces of cream type and strip type denture adhesives with or without salivary substitutes. Conclusion:From this study, it is concluded that denture adhesive will definitely increases the denture retention. The cream type denture adhesive with salivary substitutes has the most retention than among all groups [Shah D Natl J Integr Res Med, 2020; 11(6): 43-48]
2. Sato Y, Kaiba Y, Hayakawa I. The Evaluation of Denture Retention and Ease of Removal from Oral Mucosa on a New Gel-Type Denture Adhesive. 2008;
3. Le BT, Borzabadi-Farahani A. Simultaneous implant placement and bone grafting with particulate mineralized allograft in sites with buccal wall defects, a three-year follow-up and review of literature. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg [Internet]. 2014;42(5):552–9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2013.07.026
4. Gurkar H, Venkatesh OY, Somashekar JM, Gowda MHL, Dwivedi M, Ningthoujam I. Prosthodontic Management of Xerostomic Patient: A Technical Modification. Case Rep Dent. 2016;2016(Figure 1):1–7.
5. Gupta R, Luthra RP, Kumar N, Resident J, Pradesh H, Pradesh H. A Comparative Analysis of retention of denture bases without and after surface treatment of basal surface with different sizes of alumina particles - An in vivo study. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res. 2015;3(4):102–8.
6. Pachore NJ, Patel JR, Sethuraman R, Naveen YG. A Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Three Types of Denture Adhesives on the Retention of Maxillary Denture Bases: An In Vivo Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014;14(4):369–75.
7. Aslam A. XEROSTOMIA AND ITS EFFECT ON COMPLETE. 2017;(March).
8. Mohsin AH Bin, Varalakshmi Reddy S, Praveen Kumar M, Samee S. Aloe vera for dry mouth denture patients – Palliative therapy. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2017;11(6):ZC20–3.
9. Yadav A, Yadav S. Denture adhesives – their stand in prosthodontics. 2005;5(2):5–7.
10. Joshi PR, Joshi S. Clinical application of Denture adhesives-A review . 2013;13(1):63–6.
11. Vissink A, de Jong HP, Busscher HJ, Arends J, ’s-Gravenmade EJ. Wetting Properties of Human Saliva and Saliva Substitutes. J Dent Res. 1986;65(9):1121–4.
Copyright (c) 2020 National Journal of Integrated Research in Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.