The Effect of Eight Types of Denture Adhesives on Retention of Milled Denture Base Acrylic Resin

Abstract

Objective: The retention of removable dentures is a primary concern for patients. Accordingly, this in vitro study aims to compare the retention strength of four commercial brands (eight formulations), offering cream type denture adhesives that can be brought in Thailand, on milled denture base acrylic resin. Material and methods: Eight milled acrylic resin molds were fabricated according to ISO10873:2021 and the retention strength of eight denture adhesives [Fittydent (Ft), Fixodent Original (FxO), Fixodent Microseal for Partials (FxM), Fixodent PLUS Best Foodseal Technology (FxFS), Fixodent Plus Best Hold (FxBH), Fixodent Ultra Max Hold (FxMH), Olivafix (O) and Polident (P)] were measured in each milled mold for ten times. All the data were analyzed independently by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc test with a Least Significant Difference (LSD) multiple comparison test at a 95% level of significance. Results: The study found statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences in mean retention strength between groups of denture adhesives. The Ft, O and P groups showed statistically significant (p < 0.05) differences to every other group. There was no significant difference between Fixodent groups (FxO, FxM, FxFS, FxBH and FxMH). The lowest and the highest retention strength were found in the Ft and the FxFS groups respectively. Conclusions: According to ISO 10873:2021, the retention strength of denture adhesive should be more than 5 kPa. All tested adhesives have reached this threshold. All Fixodent groups have higher retention strength than Fittydent, Olivafix and Polident adhesives. There are no significant differences within the Fixodent group. Authors recommend Polident because it offers the best efficiency measured in kPa/THB or Fixodent Original because it offers the lowest cost per gram solution in the highest retention group. > ว.ทันต.มศว ปีที่ 16 ฉบับที่ 1 พ.ศ. 2566 หน้า 134-147. > SWU Dent J. 2023;16(1): 134-147.