Evaluation of the physical properties of a newly developed denture adhesive for patients with dry mouth

Effect of the denture adhesive for dry mouth on the retentive force of the experimental palatal plates: a pilot controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

A denture adhesive for dry mouth with good cleaning properties has recently been developed. While previous studies on models have shown the effectiveness of denture adhesives in terms of retention and cleanability, no reports have evaluated their effectiveness in the oral cavity. The aim of this study was to compare and investigate the retention and usability of an experimental palatal plate in the dentulous jaw using a denture adhesive for dry mouth, a conventional cream-type denture adhesive, an oral moisturizer, and a denture moisturizer.

METHODS

Ten healthy dentulous participants (mean age 27.2 ± 1.6 years) were included in the study. Palatal plates were fabricated. Four test samples were used: denture adhesive for dry mouth, conventional denture adhesive (cream type), oral moisturizer, and denture moisturizer. The sample was applied to the inner surface of the palatal plates, and the retentive force of the palatal plate was measured every 10 min for 30 min. After the measurements, the study participants were asked to rinse the palatal plate with water and subjectively evaluate the samples used.

RESULTS

The conventional denture adhesive (cream type) showed increased retentive force over time, with the maximum retentive force obtained after 10 min of application. However, its washability was rated second lowest. The denture adhesive for dry mouth showed the highest retentive force immediately after application. Its washability was also good.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the denture adhesive for dry mouth has reasonable retentive force in the oral cavity and cleaning properties compared to the conventional cream-type denture adhesive.

Effect of traction direction and pressure load on the palatal plate on retentive force

Background

Recently, a denture adhesive that is easy to clean and contain moisturizing ingredients have been developed for patients with dry mouth. Although the retentive force produced by conventional denture adhesives and oral moisturizers have been compared on models, no study has reported their comparison in the oral cavity. In this study, we aimed to clarify the effects of different directions of traction and loads at the time of pressure contact on the retentive force on a palatal plate made from a dentulous jaw model.

Methods

A palatal plate was fabricated with thermoplastic resin on a dentulous jaw model, and a loop-shaped traction device was attached to the centre of the palate. The test samples were a cream-type denture adhesive, a denture adhesive for dry mouth, an oral moisturizer, and a denture moisturizer. The specimens were applied to the inner surface of the plate, which was then mounted under vertical pressure. Then, the retentive force was measured, using a digital force gauge, while the plate was pulled in different directions and with different loads.

Results

No significant difference in retentive force was observed in any of the test samples when the direction of traction was between 45° and 60°. The retentive force of the denture adhesive for dry mouth was significantly higher with a direction of traction of 90° than that of 45° or 60°. The retentive force when oral moisturizer was used was significantly higher in the 90° traction direction than in the 45° direction. There was no significant difference between a force of 4.0 kgf or 5.5 kgf when using a denture adhesive for dry mouth. Comparing the four load size conditions, the larger the load, the higher was the retentive force. Similar results were obtained for the cream-type denture adhesive and denture moisturizer. Significantly higher retentive force was observed for larger loads when oral moisturizer was used.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the direction of traction and the pressure load affect the retentive force on a palatal plate.

Changes in denture retention with denture adhesives and oral moisturizers for the oral cavity: an in vitro study

Background

It is difficult to maintain complete dentures during meals in place. This in vitro study aimed to assess changes in denture retention between rest and function using denture adhesives and oral moisturizers in an oral cavity model.

Methods

The following test samples were applied between the palatal plate and the edentulous jaw ridge model: denture adhesive, denture adhesive for dry mouth, oral moisturizer, and denture moisturizer. The retentive force was measured under two conditions: at rest while immersed in water and during function with a 2.5-kg load applied. The plate was pulled perpendicular to the occlusal plane and the retentive force was measured using a digital force gauge.

Results

Under dry conditions, denture adhesive for dry mouth and oral moisturizer had a significantly higher retentive force than denture adhesive and denture moisturizer. After 30 min of immersion in water, the retentive force of the denture adhesive increased while that of the oral moisturizer decreased. After 30 min of function, the retentive force of the denture adhesive and denture adhesive for dry mouth remained high, while that of the oral moisturizer and denture moisturizer significantly decreased. Between rest and function, the retentive force of the denture adhesive and denture adhesive for dry mouth was high, and that of the oral moisturizer was low.

Conclusions

Immediately after use, denture adhesive for dry mouth exhibited high retentive force, but retention gradually decreased due to its water content.

Removal of denture adhesives from PMMA and Polyamide denture base materials

Denture adhesives need complete removal due to their frequent replacement.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

This comprehensive review of the 2019 restorative dental literature is offered to inform busy dentists regarding remarkable publications and noteworthy progress made in the profession. Developed by the Scientific Investigation Committee of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry, each author brings discipline-specific expertise to 1 of 8 sections of the report: (1) prosthodontics; (2) periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; (3) implant dentistry; (4) dental materials and therapeutics; (5) occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; (6) sleep-related breathing disorders; (7) oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and (8) dental caries and cariology. The report targets important information likely to influence day-to-day dental treatment decisions. Each review is not intended to stand alone but to update interested readers so that they may visit source material when greater detail is desired. As the profession moves toward evidence-based clinical decision-making, an incredible volume of potentially valuable dental literature continues to increase. It is the intention of this review and its authors to provide assistance in negotiating the extensive dental literature published in 2019. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in the clinical management of dental patients.