The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 24 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2023 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Influence of Three Different Denture Cleansers on Surface Roughness and Strength of Heat-polymerizing Resin: An In Vitro Study

Prathima Kyathappa, Sonia Sara Jacob, Dhirendra Kumar Singh, Taseer Bashir, Nimish H Oberoi, Crystal Runa Soans, Priya Patel

Keywords : Denture cleansers, Flexural strength, Heat-polymerizing resin, Surface roughness

Citation Information : Kyathappa P, Jacob SS, Singh DK, Bashir T, Oberoi NH, Soans CR, Patel P. Influence of Three Different Denture Cleansers on Surface Roughness and Strength of Heat-polymerizing Resin: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023; 24 (8):556-559.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3508

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-09-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the impact of three different denture cleansers on the strength and surface roughness of heat-polymerizing resin. Materials and methods: A total of 120 resin discs (10 mm in diameter and 2 mm thick) were created using a stainless steel mold for surface roughness testing and flexural strength testing (in accordance with the American Dental Association (ADA) Specification No.12). Samples were divided into one of three groups (40 samples in each group): group I: Clanden, group II: Clinsodent, group III: Fittydent. Samples were immersed in denture-cleansing solutions for 30 minutes every day, and this process was repeated over a period of 15 days. Samples were stored in distilled water at room temperature in between the immersions. A surface analyzer was utilized to compare the surface roughness of each sample before and after immersion treatments. For recording flexural strength, each sample was subjected to three-point bending test by mounting samples on Universal testing machine. Comparing mean values between groups using one-way ANOVA and the Tukeys honest significant difference (HSD) post hoc test. A significance level of 0.05 was used for all statistical calculations Results: After 15 days, the maximum change of mean surface roughness of heat-polymerizing resin was found in Clanden denture cleanser group (2.64 ± 0.12) followed by Clinsodent group (2.26 ± 0.09) and Fittydent group (1.92 ± 0.06). After 15 days, the maximum change of mean flexural strength changes of heat-polymerizing resin was found in Clanden denture cleanser group (94.78 ± 0.14), followed by Fittydent group (98.64 ± 0.03) and Clinsodent group (99.26 ± 0.21). Conclusion: Within the limitation, the current study concluded that changes were observed in surface roughness and flexural strength of all heat-polymerizing resin samples after immersion in all three denture cleansers; but least surface roughness and flexural strength changes were observed with the Fittydent cleanser group and Clinsodent group, respectively. Clinical significance: Cleaning dentures is crucial for maintaining both the prosthesis and oral health; therefore, it is necessary to select a cleanser that is effective without negatively affecting the base resin's qualities over time.

PDF Share
  1. Al-Fouzan AF, Al-mejrad LA, Albarrag AM. Adherence of Candida to complete denture surfaces in vitro: a comparison of conventional and CAD/CAM complete dentures. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9(5):402–408. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.402.
  2. Paranhos HF, Silva-Lovato CH, Souza RF, et al. Effects of mechanical and chemical methods on denture biofilm accumulation. J Oral Rehabil 2007;34(8):606–612. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01753.x.
  3. Yatabe M, Seki H, Shirasu N, et al. Effect of the reducing agent on the oxygen inhibited layer of the cross-linked reline material. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28(2):180–185. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.2001.00634.x.
  4. Paranhos Hde F, Davi LR, Peracini A, et al. Comparison of physical and mechanical properties of microwave-polymerized acrylic resin after disinfection in sodium hypochlorite solutions. Braz Dent J 2009;20(4):331–335. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402009000400012.
  5. Paranhos Hde F, Peracini A, Pisani MX, et al. Color stability, surface roughness and flexural strength of an acrylic resin submitted to simulated overnight immersion in denture cleansers. Braz Dent J 2013;24(2):152–156. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201302151.
  6. Pires-de-Souza FC, Panzeri H, Vieira MA, et al. Impact and fracture resistance of an experimental acrylic polymer with elastomer in different proportions. Mater Res. 2009;12(4):415–418. DOI: 10.1590/S1516-14392009000400007
  7. Sharma P, Garg S, Kalra NM. Effect of denture cleansers on surface roughness and flexural strength of heat cure denture base resin-an in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11(8):94–97. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/27307.10483.
  8. Oliveira LV, Mesquita MF, Henriques GE, et al. Effect of polishing technique and brushing on surface roughness of acrylic resins. J Prosthodont 2008;17(4):308–311. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00274.x.
  9. Tripathi P, Phukela SS, Yadav B, et al. An in vitro study to evaluate and compare the surface roughness in heat-cured denture-based resin and injection-molded resin system as affected by two commercially available denture cleansers. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2018; 18(4):291–298. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_335_17.
  10. Yadav R, Yadav VS, Garg S, et al. Effectiveness of different denture cleansing method on removal of biofilms formed in vivo. Journal of Craniomaxillary disease. 2013;2(1):22–27. DOI:10.4103/2278-9588.113582.
  11. Rodrigues Garcia RC, Joane Augusto de S Jr, Rached RN, et al. Effect of denture cleansers on the surface roughness and hardness of a microwave-cured acrylic resin and dental alloys. J Prosthodont. 2004; 13(3):173–178. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2004.04028.x.
  12. Ural C, Sanal FA, Cengiz S. Effect of different denture cleansers on surface roughness of denture base materials. Clin Dent Res. 2011;35(2):14–20. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332099907_EFFECT_OF_DIFFERENT_DENTURE_CLEANSERS_ON_SURFACE_ROUGHNESS_OF_DENTURE_BASE_MATERIALS.
  13. Grajower R, Goultschin J. The transverse strength of acrylic resin strips and of repaired acrylic samples. J Oral Rehabil 1984;11(3):237–247. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1984.tb00573.x.
  14. Harrison A, Huggett R. Effect of the curing cycle on residual monomerlevels of acrylic resin denture base polymers. J Dent 1992;20(6):370–374. DOI: 10.1016/0300-5712(92)90031-7.
  15. Smith LSA, Schmitz V. The effect of water sorption on the glass transition temperature of poly(methyl methacrylate). Polymer (Guildf) 1988;29(10):1871–1878. DOI: 10.1016/0032-3861(88)90405-3
  16. Puri D, Dhawan P, Madhukar P, et al. An evaluative in vitro study of the effect of the three commercially available denture cleansers on physical properties of heat-cured resin. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2020;10(1):26–31. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1263.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.