In vivo evaluation of the impact of various border molding materials and techniques on the retention of complete maxillary dentures

7Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background. Different techniques and impression materials are employed in the process of fabricating complete denture (CD) bases. Objectives. The aim of this study was to determine differences in the denture base retention for acrylic maxillary CDs when using 2 different techniques and impression materials. Specifically, the green stick compound impression material was used for the sectional border molding technique and this was compared to using the addition vinyl silicone impression material with the single-step technique. Material and methods. A crossover study was conducted on 10 participants who were completely edentulous in the upper arch (6 men and 4 women), aged 43–70 years. The participants’ trays were split into 2 treatment groups: the P-group; and the Z-group. Addition vinyl silicone was used for single-step border molding in the P-group, followed by light-body final-wash impression. For the Z-group, the green stick compound was used for sectional border molding, followed by a final wash using a zinc oxide-eugenol material.To quantify the retention force of the denture base in kilograms-force, a digital force gauge was used. Results. The measurements indicated significantly higher mean retention values (p = 0.000) in the P-group (4.02 ±1.66 kgf ) as compared to the Z-group (1.48 ±0.90 kgf ). Conclusions. The results suggest the superiority of using the single-step border molding technique in the upper arch with the addition vinyl silicone material owing to the enhanced base retention of the acrylic denture base.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jassim, T. K., Kareem, A. E., & Alloaibi, M. A. (2020). In vivo evaluation of the impact of various border molding materials and techniques on the retention of complete maxillary dentures. Dental and Medical Problems, 57(2), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/115104

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free