Home Subscription Services
 
 
Loading
NEW
Sign Up to Receive Quintessence Updates by Email
 

 
Quintessence International
QI Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTubeRSS
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: QI
Quintessence International

Edited by Eli Eliav

ISSN 0033-6572 (print) • ISSN 1936-7163 (online)

Publication:
September 2011
Volume 42 , Issue 8

Back
Share Abstract:

The effect of processing methods and acrylic resins on the accuracy of maxillary dentures and toothless denture bases: An in vitro study

Henrike Venus, DDS/Klaus Boening, Prof Dr Med/Ingrid Peroz, Priv Doz

Pages: 669–677
PMID: 21842007

Objective: To compare the dimensional changes of two autopolymerising denture base resins using three different processing techniques. Method and Materials: Sixty edentulous denture bases were made from the polymethylmethacrylates FuturaGen and PalaXpress. Ten bases were made from each resin using a manual injection technique (MI), a pneumatic injection technique (PI), and the fluid resin technique (F). Posterior palatal gap widths between casts and denture bases were measured. For an additional three-dimensional examination of occlusal changes, 10 maxillary dentures were made using FuturaGen/MI and 10 using PalaXpress/PI. Intermolar widths and changes in vertical dimension were determined. In all groups, measurements were taken after polymerization, after removal and repositioning, after polishing, and after storage in water for 1 and 3 weeks. Data were analyzed by using two-way ANOVA and Tukey test (P < .05). Results: There were no differences in dimensional changes of FuturaGen and PalaXpress specimens. The pneumatic injection system produced significantly smaller posterior palatal gaps after storage in water for 3 weeks compared to the manual injection system (P < .0005) and the fluid resin technique (P = .003). The posterior gaps of dentures were ≤ 0.04 mm and below the recommended depth for carving a posterior palatal seal (0.4 to 3.0 mm). Conclusion: The processing technique rather than the choice of the two resins seems to be the dominate variable with respect to dimensional changes. (Quintessence Int 2011;42:669–677)

Key words: dentures, dimensional changes, injection system, polymethylmethacrylate, posterior palatal gap, posterior palatal seal

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2013 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog