The Influence of Water Storage on Durometer Hardness of 5 Soft Denture Liners Over Time

PURPOSE: This laboratory study investigated the influence of water storage on the durometer hardness of 2 RTV and 3 HTV soft denture liners over a 1-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five soft denture liners were used: 2 HTV silicone rubber (Luci-Sof and Molloplast-B), 1 RTV silicone rubber (Tokuyama), 1 HTV polyphosphazene (Novus), and an RTV plasticized acrylic (PermaSoft) that uses a surface sealer. They were processed following manufacturers' instructions, cured, and stored in tap water at 37 degrees C. The water was changed every 2 weeks. Five durometer A hardness measurements were made at logarithmically spaced intervals of 16.7 minutes, 27.8 hours, 11.6 days, 34.7 days, 115 days, and 347 days. Repeated measures analysis of variance (MANOVA), one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pillai trace statistic, the difference scores (last-first) among the groups, and the Tamhane T2 multiple comparison test were used to compare the groups over time, all on SPSS V. 7.5 and 9.0. RESULTS: The order of highest initial indentation hardness was Luci-Sof, Molloplast-B, Novus (H(D)= 38 to 33). Tokuyama and PermaSoft as a group were softer (H(D)= 18 to 22). Tokuyama Soft Relining changed the least over 347 days, followed by Luci-Sof, Novus, Molloplast-B, and PermaSoft in that order (p < or = 0.05). Within the PermaSoft group, sealer applied only once changed the least over 347 days, followed by no sealer, and then sealer applied every month (p < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: After 347 days of water storage, Tokuyama had the lowest indentation hardness changes, followed by Luci-Sof, Novus, PermaSoft with sealer applied once; Molloplast-B, PermaSoft without sealer; and PermaSoft with sealer applied every month. All HTV soft denture liners had higher indentation hardness than RTV liners initially. After 347 days, PermaSoft without sealer and with sealer every month became the hardest.     

Effect of storage duration on the hardness and tensile bond strength of silicone- and acrylic resin-based resilient denture liners to a processed denture base acrylic resin

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Two potential problems commonly identified with a denture base incorporating a resilient liner are a failure of the bond between the acrylic resin and resilient liner material and a loss of resiliency of the resilient liner material over time. PURPOSE: This investigation evaluated the effect of storage duration on the tensile bond strength and hardness of acrylic resin- and silicone-based resilient liners that were either heat- or autopolymerized onto denture base acrylic resin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The denture liners investigated were a definitive acrylic resin-based heat-polymerized (Vertex Soft), interim acrylic resin-based autopolymerized (Coe-Soft), definitive silicone-based heat-polymerized (Molloplast-B), and definitive silicone-based autopolymerized (Mollosil Plus) resilient liner. The resilient liners were processed according to manufacturers' instructions. The resilient liner specimens for tensile bond strength testing (n=10) were 10 x 10 x 3 mm and were processed between 2 polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) (Meliodent) blocks (40 x 10 x 10 mm). The resilient liner specimens for hardness testing (n=10) were 20 mm in diameter and 12 mm in height. Specimen shape and liner thickness were standardized. Specimens were stored for 1 day, 1 week, or 1, 3, or 6 months in water at 37 degrees C. Tensile bond strength was measured in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 20 mm/min, and hardness was measured using a Shore A durometer. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were used to analyze the data (alpha=.05). RESULTS: The results indicated that there were significant differences both in the hardness and bond strength values of resilient liner materials. The definitive silicone-based heat-polymerized (Molloplast-B) resilient liner had significantly higher bond strength and lower hardness values than the others. Prolonged exposure to water produced significantly higher hardness values and lower bond strength values. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, specimens of resilient liners immersed in water demonstrated significantly (P<.001) lower bond strength values and higher hardness values over time.     

Effect of storage duration on tensile bond strength of acrylic or silicone-based soft denture liners to a processed denture base polymer

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of storage duration on the tensile bond strength of acrylic and silicone-based denture base materials with liners either heat-cured or auto-cured. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The denture liners investigated were Vertex soft (acrylic-based, heat-cured), Coe soft (acrylic-based, auto-cured), Molloplast-B (silicone-based, heat-cured), and Mollosil plus (silicone-based, auto-cured). The soft liner specimens were 10 x 10 x 3 mm and were processed between two PMMA blocks. They were tested following immersion in water at 37 degrees C for 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, and 6 months. Tensile bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine (Testometric Micro 500) at a crosshead speed of 20 mm/min (n = 10 specimens per experimental group). Multiple ANOVA and Tukey HSD were used to analyse the data at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. RESULTS: The results indicate that the tensile bond strength of acrylic-based soft liners is greater than that of silicone-based materials. The bond strength of all lining materials decreases with storage duration; the decrease being greatest for the acrylic-based soft liners. The decrease in bond strength of the auto-cured materials is greater than that of the heat-cured products. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Comparison of the materials in this study indicates that the silicone-based, heat-cured soft liner is superior, based on the tensile bond strength property. Use of silicone-based, heat-cured soft liners may provide better clinical success over a long period. These laboratory results need to be verified by clinical testing.     

An alternative to conventional overdenture attachments with Molloplast-B: a technique

The use of Molloplast-B within the abutments of mandibular overdentures is an easy and inexpensive method for increasing retention and stability of dentures. The use of a retentive area prepared in natural tooth structure increases retentive capabilities for the overdenture patient. Unlike some silicone denture liners, Molloplast-B has shown an inhibitory effect to the growth of Candida albicans. Molloplast-B can be used in the conventional overdenture method or as described for an immediate overdenture. This type of overdenture can be relined easily to adjust for changes in mouth architecture. How well this material will retain its shape and consistency needs to be observed.     

In vitro hardness,water sorption,and resin solubility of laboratory-processed and autopolymerized long-term resilient denture liners over one year of water storage

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The clinical properties of resilient denture liners may be influenced by the method by which they are polymerized. PURPOSE: This in vitro study investigated material property changes of 2 new resilient denture lining materials that represent 2 different curing modes: autopolymerization and conventional laboratory processing. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two silicone-based liner products were tested; one was allowed to autopolymerize (Tokuyama Soft Relining Paste), and the other was laboratory processed (Luci-Sof). Ninety-six disk-shaped specimens (31 x 10 mm) were fabricated in aluminum ring molds for hardness testing. Sixty bar-shaped specimens (44 x 8.5 x 1.2 mm) were fabricated in aluminum molds for water sorption and resin solubility testing. Shore A hardness was determined directly after specimen fabrication and after 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year of water storage at 37 degrees C. Water sorption and resin solubility were determined at the same time intervals. Analysis of variance and appropriate t tests were used to determine the effect of immersion duration both within and between the products tested. All statistical testing was performed at alpha=.05. RESULTS: The hardness values of the laboratory-processed material were consistently greater than those of the autopolymerized material. After 1 week of water storage, the hardness of the autopolymerized specimens stabilized, whereas the hardness of the laboratory-processed specimens increased with immersion duration. Water sorption values for the 2 test products were similar after 6 months and after 1 year of water storage. At 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year, significantly lower resin solubility (P<.05) was recorded for the autopolymerized specimens compared with their laboratory-processed counterparts. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the laboratory-processed material was harder than the autopolymerized product and demonstrated greater resin solubility over time. The latter result was not expected.     

Energy absorption and hardness of chair-side denture soft lining materials

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the hardness and energy absorption properties of four commercially available chairside silicone denture soft lining materials and to compare their properties with those of a heat-polymerized silicone denture liner. The denture lining materials investigated were four auto-polymerising silicone soft liners (GC Reline Soft, Ufigel SC, Elite Soft Relining and Tokuyama Sofreliner S) and a heat-polymerised silicone liner (Molloplast B). The soft liners were processed according to manufacturers' instructions. The specimens for hardness testing were 38 x 38 x 3 mm. The specimens for energy absorption test were 10 x 10 x 3 mm. In each test ten samples of each material were tested. There was strong evidence that Tokuyama Sofreliner S and, to a lesser extent, Ufigel SC, were less stiff and more resilient than Molloplast B. There was also strong evidence that both GC Reline Soft and Elite Soft Relining were harder than Molloplast B, while Ufigel SC and Tokuyama Sofreliner S were softer In conclusion differences existed between hardness and energy absorption properties of the soft lining materials.     

Effect of denture cleansers on the hardness of heat- or auto-cured acrylic- or silicone-based soft denture liners

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of short (24 hours) and long term (6 months) exposure to a variety of commercially available denture cleanser solutions on the hardness of a variety of acrylic- and silicone-based resilient liners that were either heat- or auto-cured. METHODS: The denture liners investigated were an acrylic-based heat-cured (Vertex Soft), acrylic-based auto-cured (Coe-Soft), a silicon-based heat-cured (Molloplast-B) and silicon-based auto-cured (Mollosil Plus) resilient liners. Cylindirical specimens (20 mm diameter, 12 mm high) were made of each material, using 10 replications for each test condition. Immersion solutions consisted of distilled water (control), and those based on alcohol, chlorhexidine, or an alkaline peroxide (Dermacol, aqueous chlorhexidine, Steradent) as a major active component. Specimens were fabricated according to manufacturer directions. Shore-A durameter hardness readings were taken on all specimens at each time interval and then compared statistically using four-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD (alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: The results of this study indicated that, compared with distilled water, significant effect on the hardness of the specimens were found after immersion in all of the denture cleanser solutions at 24 hours and at 6 months. Specimens immersed in chlorhexidine showed higher and significant hardness changes than those immersed in other cleanser solutions. Also, it was determined that hardness of resilient liner materials increased with time and significantly higher hardness was recorded at 6 months for the auto-cured specimens compared with their heat-cured counterparts.     

Simplified methods for fabricating tissue-supported implant-retained overdentures with retention from a resilient liner.

Resilient denture liner materials can be useful for tissue-supported implant-retained overdentures. They allow physiologic movement of the denture toward the tissues. This article presents a technique that offers several advantages over other methods of fabricating the overdenture with a resilient liner, and of transferring the superstructure: the acrylic resin base and the heat-cured resilient liner material are cured simultaneously; superstructure blockout is performed in the laboratory instead of in the mouth, where blockout is difficult; and direct transfer of the superstructure bar is more accurate and eliminates possible fracture of the duplicated superstructure if formed in die stone.     

Some variables influencing the bond strength between PMMA and a silicone denture lining material

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of roughening the denture base surface on the tensile and shear bond strengths of a poly(dimethylsiloxane) resilient lining material (Molloplast-B) bonded to a heat-cured acrylic resin denture base material. These measured bond strengths were compared to those obtained by packing the soft lining material against poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) denture base acrylic resin dough. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of 10 specimens each were constructed for both tensile and shear tests. In the first group, Molloplast-B was packed against cured PMMA denture base surface. In the second group, Molloplast-B was packed against cured PMMA denture base whose surface had been roughened with an acrylic bur. In a third group, Molloplast-B was packed against PMMA denture base acrylic resin dough. RESULTS: Molloplast-B exhibited significantly higher tensile and shear bond strengths when packed against acrylic resin dough. Roughening the denture base surface prior to the application of Molloplast-B had a statistically significant weakening effect on tensile bond strength compared with the smooth surface and the acrylic resin dough. For the shear bond strength, roughening the surface produced a nonsignificant increase compared with the smooth surface, but the bond was weaker than when packed against acrylic resin dough. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in tensile and shear bond strength were recorded between the three methods used to bond Molloplast-B to denture base material.     

Bond strength and failure analysis of lining materials to denture resin.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to investigate the bonding properties of five lining materials to a denture base resin. Two hard (chemical-cured resin: Kooliner "Coe Labs, USA" and light-cured VLC resin: Triad "Dentsply, USA") and three soft (chemical-cured resin: Express "Alcos,-USA", heat-temperature vulcanized 'HTV' silicone material: Molloplast-B "Regneri GmbH, Germany" and room-temperature vulcanized 'RTV' silicone material:Ufi Gel-P "Voco, Germany") liners were used. METHODS: Paladent 20 "Heraeus Kulzer GmbH, Germany", a conventional heat-cured polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), was used as the denture base resin and as the control material. Bonding strength and adhesion properties of the liners to PMMA were compared by tensile test and scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis. After curing, an aging process was applied and the samples were immersed and stored in distilled water at 37 +/- 1 degrees C and taken out at certain aging intervals (at 0, 15, 30 and 90 days) for examination. Specimens (168) were processed for tensile tests and other specimens (24) for fracture tests. The mean and standard deviation values were calculated. Changes in the mechanical properties and the SEM findings of the adhered surfaces were evaluated. RESULTS: Triad (a hard liner) has the closest tensile strength to the control, indicating the strongest bonding between the base and the liner. Also, during the aging process, formation of better adhesion was observed in SEM micrographs. From the SEM analysis it was found that, Molloplast-B (a soft liner) also has a very good filling capacity. SIGNIFICANCE: Among the hard lining materials, VLC resin to chemical-cured resin; and among the soft lining materials, HTV resin to RTV and chemical-cured ones should be preferred for relining procedures. Molloplast-B and Express as resilient liners were found to have adequate adhesive values for clinical use.     

The Effect of Aging by Thermal Cycling and Mechanical Brushing on Resilient Denture Liner Hardness and Roughness

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of aging on resilient denture liners. The aging effects were produced by using thermal cycling and mechanical brushing and were quantified as changes to surface hardness and roughness of resilient denture liners.
Material and Methods: A plasticized acrylic resin (Dentuflex) and two silicone-based (Molloplast-B, Sofreliner MS) resilient denture liners were examined. Pre- and post-test roughness and hardness measurements were recorded using a Surfcorder SE 1700 and Shore A durometer Teclock GS-709, respectively. Sixty specimens were manufactured; half were subjected to 3000 cycles in the thermal cycler (5 and 55°C). The remaining specimens received 30,000 strokes applied by a mechanical brushing machine followed by 3000 thermal cycles. Representative specimens from each group were observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were examined by multiple ANOVA, split-plot analysis, and Tukey test (α= 0.05).
Results: Shore A hardness values for Dentuflex, Molloplast-B, and Sofreliner MS soft liners were different from each other ( p < 0.05) before (79 ± 2.9; 40 ± 1.4; 33 ± 0.7) and after (80 ± 3.1; 40 ± 1; 34 ± 0.9) thermocycling. The surface roughness (in μm) of the same soft liner materials was significantly different ( p < 0.05) at the start (2.2 ± 0.4; 1.6 ± 0.6; 0.2 ± 0.1) but it was not different ( p > 0.05) after tooth brushing (1.7 ± 0.3; 1.7 ± 0.4; 1.9 ± 0.8) or thermocycling (1.6 ± 0.5; 1.6 ± 0.6; 1.5 ± 0.5)
Conclusion: Thermal cycling promoted increased hardness for Sofreliner MS and Dentuflex. Mechanical brushing promoted wear abrasion in Sofreliner MS and Dentuflex materials. Molloplast-B experienced no deleterious effects from either of the tests.     

Evaluation of varying amounts of thermal cycling on bond strength and permanent deformation of two resilient denture liners

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Two problems found in prostheses with resilient liners are bond failure to the acrylic resin base and increased permanent deformation due to material aging. PURPOSE: This in vitro study evaluated the effect of varying amounts of thermal cycling on bond strength and permanent deformation of 2 resilient denture liners bonded to an acrylic resin base. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Plasticized acrylic resin (PermaSoft) or silicone (Softliner) resilient lining materials were processed to a heat-polymerized acrylic resin (QC-20). One hundred rectangular specimens (10 x 10-mm 2 cross-sectional area) and 100 cylindrically-shaped specimens (12.7-mm diameter x 19.0-mm height) for each liner/resin combination were used for the tensile and deformation tests, respectively. Specimen shape and liner thickness were standardized. Specimens were divided into 9 test groups (n=10) and were thermal cycled for 200, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000, 3500, and 4000 cycles. Control specimens (n=10) were stored for 24 hours in water at 37 degrees C. Mean bond strength, expressed as stress at failure (MPa), was determined with a tensile test using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min. Analysis of failure mode, expressed as a percent (%), was recorded as either cohesive, adhesive, or both, after observation. Permanent deformation, expressed as a percent (%), was determined using ADA specification no. 18. Data from both tests were examined with a 2-way analysis of variance and a Tukey test (alpha=.05). RESULTS: For the tensile test, Softliner specimens submitted to different thermal cycling regimens demonstrated no significantly different bond strength values from the control; however, there was a significant difference between the PermaSoft control group (0.47 +/- 0.09 MPa [mean +/- SD]) and the 500 cycle group (0.46 +/- 0.07 MPa) compared to the 4000 cycle group (0.70 +/- 0.20 MPa) ( P <.05). With regard to failure type, the Softliner groups presented adhesive failure (100%) regardless of specimen treatment. PermaSoft groups presented adhesive (53%), cohesive (12%), or a combined mode of failure (35%). For the deformation test, there was no significant difference among the Softliner specimens. However, a significant difference was observed between control and PermaSoft specimens after 1500 or more cycles (1.88% +/- 0.24%) ( P <.05). CONCLUSIONS: This in vitro study indicated that bond strength and permanent deformation of the 2 resilient denture liners tested varied according to their chemical composition.     

Interactions between thermal cycled resilient denture lining materials, salivary and serum pellicles and Candida albicans in vitro. Part II. Effects on fungal colonization

In the present study, the growth of a single isolate of Candida albicans on saliva-, serum-coated or protein free (uncoated), thermocycled (4-70 degrees C for 1 min, respectively; 0, 1000 and 10 000 times) seven commercial soft lining materials were investigated, by adenosine triphosphate (ATP) analysis. In the case of control resilient liners (not thermocycled and uncoated), the fungal colonization appeared to depend upon the type of commercial resilient liner used. Thus, the lowest colonization was observed with fluoric and heat-cured silicone materials, cold-cured silicone materials, except for one product, and heat-cured acrylic resin exhibited the highest colonization capacity, and cold-cured acrylic resilient liners exhibited the intermediate. However, the fungal colonization on the materials was significantly promoted both by thermal cycling (ANOVA, P<0.01) and a layer of protein coating (saliva, P<0.01; serum, P<0.01). These results, taken together, suggest that the ageing of the materials and the biological fluids of the host promote yeast colonization on resilient lining materials.     

Effect of ageing on the bond strength of a permanent denture soft lining material

Molloplast-B is a widely used, long-term, heat-cured silicone denture soft lining material. Adhesion failure of this material to poly (methyl methacrylate) denture base material is a problem that is encountered clinically. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of long-term immersion in water at 37 +/- 1 degrees C and of accelerated ageing in water at 50 +/- 1 degrees C on the tensile and shear bond strength values of this denture resilient lining material bonded to a heat-cured denture base material. Immersion in water for 1 week at 37 +/- 1 degrees C had no significant effect on the measured bond strength values. Longer immersion of specimens in water at 37 +/- 1 degrees C led to a significant reduction in the measured tensile and shear bond strengths. The present study has demonstrated that the reduction in Molloplast-B bond strength that occurs as a result of long-term ageing in water at 37 +/- 1 degrees C can be achieved in a shorter period of time by ageing the specimens in water at a higher temperature.     

Comparative Evaluation of Tensile Bond Strength between Silicon Soft Liners and Processed Denture Base Resin Conditioned by Three Modes of Surface Treatment: An Invitro Study

Soft denture liners act as a cushion for the denture bearing mucosa through even distribution of functional load, avoiding local stress concentrations and improving retention of dentures there by providing comfort to the patient. The objective of the present study was to compare and evaluate the tensile bond strengths of silicone-based soft lining materials (Ufi Gel P and GC Reline soft) with different surface pre treatments of heat cure PMMA denture base acrylic resin. Stainless steel dies measuring 40 mm in length; 10 mm in width and 10 mm in height (40 × 10 × 10) were machined to prepare standardized for the polymethyl methacrylate resin blocks. Stainless steel dies (spacer for resilient liner) measuring 3 mm thick; 10 mm long and 10 mm wide were prepared as spacers to ensure uniformity of the soft liner being tested. Two types of Addition silicone-based soft lining materials (room temperature polymerised soft lining materials (RTPSLM): Ufi Gel P and GC Reline soft) were selected. Ufi Gel P (VOCO, Germany), GC Reline soft (GC America) are resilient, chairside vinyl polysiloxane denture reliners of two different manufacturers. A total of 80 test samples were prepared of which 40 specimens were prepared for Group A (Ufi Gel P) and 40 specimens for Group B (GC Reline soft). In these groups, based on Pre-treatment of acrylic resin specimens each group was subdivided into four sub groups of 10 samples each. Sub-group I—without any surface treatment. Sub-group II—sand blasted Sub-group III—treated with Methyl Methacrylate monomer Sub-group IV-treated with chemical etchant Acetone. The results were statistically analysed by Kruscal Wallis test, Mann–Whitney U test, and Independent t test. The specimens treated with MMA monomer wetting showed superior and significant bond strength than those obtained by other surface treatments. The samples belonging to subgroups of GC Reline soft exhibit superior tensile bond strength than subgroups of Ufi Gel P. The modes of failure of all specimens were mostly adhesive in nature. Surface pre treatments by chemical means improved the bond strength between the silicone liners and denture base.     

The nature of the interface between polymethyl methacrylate denture base materials and soft lining materials

Four of the commonly used resilient denture lining materials were investigated. They were of different chemical composition, physical forms and processing cycles. Scanning electron microscope examinations of the interface between the liners and the regular acrylic resin base material were carried out in an attempt to assess the bonding of these materials to the denture base, and to evaluate the reliability of their use. The physical and mechanical bonding properties of the resilient lining materials to acrylics were studied, which included tensile, shear, peel and compression tests to measure the efficacy of the joint between the acrylic and the lining materials and its resistance to various external damaging loads. The effect of water on the liner/denture base interface and on the liner's bonding properties to acrylics was also investigated, and the validity of roughening the tissue surface of the denture base prior to processing the liner was assessed.

The findings point to the advisability of using the acrylic type of soft liners whenever resilient liners are indicated. Roughening the fitting surface of the denture base to which the resilient lining materials are to be applied has a weakening effect on the bond between the lining and the denture base. Long-term exposure of the liners to water has a destructive effect. The infusion of the water into the material leads to swelling and stresses build up at the denture base interface and these tend to promote distortion and reduction in bonding.     

In Vitro Changes in Hardness of Sealed Resilient Lining Materials on Immersion in Various Fluids

Purpose: During clinical use, resilient lining materials undergo changes in hardness that make them ineffective. The aims of this investigation were (1) to determine the effect of a resilient lining sealer on the hardness of four resilient denture liners; and (2) to determine the effect of the sealer on hardness after immersion in various solutions.
Materials and Methods: Two sets of specimens of four resilient liners, Coe-comfort (CC), PermaSoft (PS), Tokuyama soft reline (TK), and Total-Soft (TS), 6-mm diameter by 4-mm thickness, were fabricated. Two coats of Permaseal, a soft reline sealant, were applied to one set of specimens of each material according to manufacturers' instructions. Sealed and unsealed samples were divided into four groups (n = 10). Each group was immersed in one of the following solutions: artificial saliva at 37°C, Efferdent, Efferdent with once daily scrubbing with a soft toothbrush, and 50% ethanol. Shore A hardness numbers were obtained at 0, 1, 3, 7, 30, and 90 days. A two-way ANOVA test was performed using materials (treated and untreated) and immersion solution as independent variables. The percentage change in hardness after the 90-day immersion period was the dependent variable.
Results: The results show that the application of sealant significantly improved the durability of CC, PS, and TS in immersion solutions by maintaining hardness close to preimmersion values or delaying the softening effect of the solutions. The hardness of sealed and unsealed TK showed the significantly ( p < 0.05) lowest change after immersion in the test solutions. Ethanol caused the most severe decrease in hardness of all solutions, followed by saliva. Immersion in Efferdent and daily brushing after immersion in Efferdent showed only a mild effect on the hardness of the soft reline agents.
Conclusion: The use of a sealer can play an important role in the preservation of the hardness of some resilient lining materials.     

Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the gap width between a denture base resin and two long-term, resilient denture liners

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The junction between a long-term, resilient denture liner and the denture base is difficult to finish and polish due to differences in the hardness of the materials. Gaps tend to form during finishing and polishing procedures. PURPOSE: This study measured the junctional gap between 2 long-term, resilient denture liners and a denture base material after different finishing and polishing procedures were performed. The surface smoothness of the 2 liner materials also was evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Molloplast-B and an experimental, heat-polymerized methyl siloxane-resin-based denture liner were processed (according to the manufacturer's instructions) against Lucitone 199 acrylic resin. Control specimens (n = 20) were 2 mm thick and flat. Experimental specimens (n = 64) were fabricated with a raised center section: a 3- x 5- x 15-mm half-cylindrical ridge with a junction at the top of the cylinder between the liner material and acrylic resin. The specimens were finished with 1 of 6 types of burs and polished with different combinations of rubber-impregnated acrylic polishers, pumice, and tin oxide. The finished specimens were examined and photographed with a scanning electron microscope, and the largest gap along the liner/denture base junction on each specimen was measured. Three-way analysis of variance without replication (P<.05) and post-hoc t tests were used to analyze the data and compare groups. RESULTS; Averaged across finishing and polishing techniques, a larger gap was recorded for the experimental liner material (22 microm) than for Molloplast-B (14 microm) (P<.00005). Qualitative evaluation suggested that the experimental liner material polished better than Molloplast-B. The smoothest surfaces were obtained when specimens were finished with fine-tooth cross-cut carbide burs and polished with both pumice and tin oxide. A comparison between polished and unpolished specimens, averaged over materials and finishing techniques, revealed that polishing reduced gap size (P=.015). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the 2 denture liners tested behaved similarly. The results suggest that the size of the gap at the liner/denture base junction may be affected by finishing and polishing techniques and vary among materials.     

Clinical evaluation of resilient denture liners. Part 2: candida count and speciation

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to count and to speciate Candida isolated from 2 resilient denture liners, Molloplast-B and MPDS-SL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 20 patients each had 1 maxillary denture and 2 mandibular dentures fabricated. One mandibular denture was lined with Molloplast-B, and 1 was lined with MPDS-SL. Each denture was used for 3 months. At the end of the 3-month period, the mandibular denture was surrendered, and a 5 x 5-mm circular resilient liner sample was obtained from the tissue surface of the lingual flange. Samples were processed, and Candida was isolated and counted. Speciation of Candida was performed using CHROMagar Candida and API 20C AUX strips. RESULTS: Molloplast-B had, on average, 5 times as many CFU/sample as MPDSL-SL, but this difference was not significant (p = 0.26). A sign test gave a similar nonsignificant trend (p = 0.057). CHROMagar identified several Candida species, and confirmation was made using API 20C AUX strips. One patient was lost to follow-up. Of 19 Molloplast-B samples, 7 had no growth, 4 grew C. albicans, 3 grew C. parapsilosis, 2 grew C. glabrata, 1 grew C. tropicalis, 2 grew a Trichosporon spp., and 2 grew a nonidentifiable colony. The analogous counts for 19 MPDS-SL samples were 10, 4, 1, 3, 0, 1, and 1 (p = 0.45 for culture positively, exact McNemar test). CONCLUSIONS: Candida growth on Molloplast-B was not significantly different from growth on MPDS-SL. Several yeast species were cultured from each material. The rates of culture-positive testing did not differ between the 2 resilient denture liners.     

Development of a nondestructive compliance test for resilient denture liners

PURPOSE: Resilient denture liners are prescribed for patients who cannot adjust to hard-based dentures because of a thin mucosa or severe alveolar ridge resorption. A nondestructive test to evaluate compliance of new soft liner materials will be useful in clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a nondestructive compliance testing technique designed to characterize long-term, silicone-based resilient denture liner materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Samples of thicknesses of 1.1, 2.2, 3.3, and 4.4 mm of 2 materials (MPDS-SL [Lai Laboratories, Inc, Burnsville, MN] and Molloplast-B [Buffalo Dental, New York, NY]) were assessed for compliance using a closed-loop servohydraulic testing system, applying a 3 lb force following a squarewave pattern; force and position values were recorded using a storage oscilloscope. The oscilloscope values were analyzed using computer software to determine compliance values. The effect of material thickness was examined by testing wedges of the 2 materials. RESULTS: The testing technique used showed that differing thicknesses had significantly different compliance values (p <.0001). In the materials used to evaluate the technique, MPDS-SL behaved more elastically than did Molloplast-B (p <.0001). Material thicknesses beyond 2.2 mm did not increase compliance, although MPDS-SL had a steeper thickness-compliance curve than Molloplast-B. CONCLUSIONS: The method used to test compliance proved to be sufficiently sensitive to distinguish between 2 materials and between varying thicknesses. The sensitivity and nondestructive nature of this test show its suitability for clinical evaluation of resilient denture liners.