Comparison of adhesiveness of chewing gum to hard and soft denture base materials.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the adhesiveness of chewing gum to hard and soft denture base materials to investigate food retention associated with the basal surface of the denture. METHODS: Test specimens were fabricated using acrylic resin[Re], cobalt-chromium alloy[Co], zirconia[Zr], silicone soft relining material[SS], and acrylic soft relining material[AS]. Samples were set on a top-and-bottom pair lifting platform equipped with a digital force gauge. The experimenter chewed 3.0 g of chewing gum for 5 min. After surface saliva was wiped off, the chewing gum was placed on the lower test fragment and compressed until the distance between the upper and lower test fragments decreased to 1 mm. The upper test fragment was pulled at a crosshead speed of 100 mm/min. Adhesiveness was measured under dry conditions, and under wet conditions with inter-positioned artificial saliva. RESULTS: Under dry conditions, the adhesive strength was 17.04 ±â€¯1.99 N for Re, 12.88 ±â€¯2.20 N for Co, 3.80 ±â€¯1.03 N for Zr, 5.76 ±â€¯1.41 N for SS, and 12.54 ±â€¯2.44 N for AS. Under wet conditions, the adhesive strength was 5.26 ±â€¯1.64 N for Re, 0.96 ±â€¯0.21 N for Co, 3.32 ±â€¯0.40 N for Zr, 5.20 ±â€¯1.35 N for SS, and 6.78 ±â€¯1.97 N for AS. CONCLUSIONS: Among the hard denture base materials, zirconia recorded low adhesiveness and Re recorded high adhesiveness under both wet and dry conditions. The adhesiveness of Co was low under wet conditions but high under dry conditions. Among the soft denture base materials, SS under dry conditions recorded lower adhesiveness than that of AS. The adhesiveness of SS was low under both wet and dry conditions.

[A case of occlusal support loss in the molar region due to distal extension missing of the left of the upper and right of the lower jaws].

PATIENT: A 74-year-old woman visited our hospital with a chief complaint of masticatory dysfunction due to upper left molar denture breakage and poor retention of upper and lower dentures. The cause of the denture breakage was a lack of clearance, and that of denture instability was the unilateral design in the upper jaw, and breakage of the indirect retainer in the lower jaw. The treatment plan was set to securing the denture strength and bracing via a bilateral design. DISCUSSION: Stability was improved by bilateral design. Ensuring clearance and subsequent place on the dentures may have secured the strength. CONCLUSION: The ability of mastication was improved by the new dentures. Regarding the strength, no breakage of the dentures occurred during the follow-up period, indicating that prosthetic treatment was appropriate.