International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  14 (2024)
Volume  13 (2023)
Volume  12 (2022)
Volume  11 (2021)
Volume  10 (2020)
Volume  9 (2019)
Volume  8 (2018)
Volume  7 (2017)
Volume  6 (2016)
Volume  5 (2015)
Volume  4 (2014)
Volume  3 (2013)
Volume  2 (2012)
Volume  1 (2011)
Related articles

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2023 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Effect of Water Sorption and Solubility on Two Soft Denture Lining Materials Stored in Three Different Mediums

Anjali Dutta, Madhurima Sharma, Shalabh Kumar, Zoya Chowdhary, Pratik Bumb, Chandan Kumar

Keywords : Cushion liner, Denture liner, Resilient liners, Solubility, Sorption

Citation Information : Dutta A, Sharma M, Kumar S, Chowdhary Z, Bumb P, Kumar C. Effect of Water Sorption and Solubility on Two Soft Denture Lining Materials Stored in Three Different Mediums. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2023; 13 (3):129-136.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1415

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-09-2023

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


Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the effect on water sorption and solubility of acrylic-based and silicone-based soft denture lining materials stored over a period of 7, 14, and 28 days in three different storage mediums [distilled water (AW), artificial saliva (AS), and denture cleaner (AC)]. Materials and methods: A total of 66 disk-shaped samples were fabricated and divided into two groups depending on the soft-liner used—acrylic (A; n = 33) and silicone (S; n = 33). The samples were subdivided further depending on the solution immersed—AW [synthetic water (SW); n = 11 each]; AS [simulated saliva (SS); n = 11 each]; and AC [solution for cleaning (SC); n = 11]. The samples were dried and weighed to measure the initial weight of the disks. All the samples were stored in their respective solution jars. On days 7, 14, and 28, the samples were reweighed to measure the weight after sorption. Water solubility and water sorption were calculated for the groups. The data collected was statistically analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and independent samples t-test. Results: There is a significant difference in group A sorption and solubility values between the subgroups at days 7 and 28, having the highest sorption value for AC (0.7393 mg/cm2), followed by AW (0.659 mg/cm2) and then AS (0.6439 mg/cm2). The highest solubility was seen in the AS (0.525 mg/cm2) and the least in the AW (0.460 mg/cm2). In group S, sorption was seen highest in AW (1.1027 mg/cm2) and the highest water solubility was seen in the AW group (0.5055 mg/cm2) and least in the denture cleanser group (0.4850 mg/cm2). The mean water sorption values of the acrylic resilient liner were significantly greater (p < 0.001) than silicone-based liners in at 7–28-day time period. There was a continuous rise in water sorption up to day 14, and later it rose marginally. Conclusion: The silicone soft liners have a lesser sorption and solubility rate than the acrylic-based soft liners. In comparison to soft liners made of acrylic and the silicone soft liners may provide better clinical success.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Izumida FE, Jorge JH, Ribeiro RC, et al. Surface roughness and Candida albicans biofilm formation on a reline resin after long-term chemical disinfection and toothbrushing. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(6):1523–1529. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.06.001
  2. Kim BJ, Yang HS, Chun MG, et al. Shore hardness and tensile bond strength of long-term soft denture lining materials. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(5):1289–1297. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.018
  3. El-Hadary A, Drummond JL. Comparative study of water sorption, solubility, and tensile bond strength of two soft lining materials. J Prosthet Dent 2000;83(3):356–361. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(00)70140-5
  4. Mutluay MM, Oguz S, Fløystrand F, et al. A prospective study on the clinical performance of polysiloxane soft liners: one-year results. Dent Mater J 2008;27(3):440–447. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.27.440
  5. Hashem MI. Advances in soft denture liners: an update. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(4):314–318. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1682
  6. Chauhan MS, Trivedi R, Singh PR, et al. Assessment of the water sorption and hardness of silicone and acrylic-based soft liners at different time period: an in vitrostudy . Int J Cur Res Rev 2021;13(5):101–105. DOI: 10.31782/IJCRR.2021.SP153
  7. Anusavice KJ. Phillip's Science of Dental Materials. 10th edition. 1996.
  8. Murata H, Hamada T, Sadamori S. Relationship between viscoelastic properties of soft denture liners and clinical efficacy. Jpn Dent Sci Rev 2008;44(2):128–132. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2008.06.001
  9. Menon A, BL B, PL R, et al. Comparative study on water sorption and solubility of three soft liners in different solutions: an in-vitro study. Int J Adv Res 2019;7:916–929. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/8716
  10. Craig RG, Gibbons P. Properties of resilient denture liners. J Am Dent Assoc 1961;63(3):382–390. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1961.0218
  11. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 2013;310(20):2191–2194. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053
  12. Garg A, Shenoy KK. A comparative evaluation of effect on water sorption and solubility of a temporary soft denture liner material when stored either in distilled water, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite or artificial saliva: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16(1):53–62. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.167931
  13. Khandelwal P, Jadhav RD, Jagtap A, et al. Evaluation of three different long-term addition polymerising silicone denture liners and to compare the changes in their hardness, modulus of elasticity and water sorption after storage in artificial saliva. Int J Health Sci 2022;6(S5):8170–8181. DOI: 10.53730/ijhs.v6nS5.10733
  14. Braden M, Wright PS. Water absorption and water solubility of soft lining materials for acrylic dentures. J Dent Res 1983;62(6):764–768. DOI: 10.1177/00220345830620061601
  15. Revised American Dental Association specification no. 12 for denture base polymers. J Am Dent Assoc 1975;90(2):451–458. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.1975.0069
  16. Garcia LT, Jones JD. Soft liners. Dent Clin North Am 2004;48(3):709–720, vii. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2004.03.001
  17. Pahuja RK, Garg S, Bansal S, et al. Effect of denture cleansers on surface hardness of resilient denture liners at various time intervals- an in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont 2013;5(3):270–277. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2013.5.3.270
  18. Ahmad F, Dent M, Yunus N. Shear bond strength of two chemically different denture base polymers to reline materials. J Prosthodont 2009;18(7):596–602. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00481.x
  19. Białożyt-Bujak E, Wyszyńska M, Chladek G, et al. Analysis of the hardness of soft relining materials for removable dentures. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021;18(18):9491. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18189491
  20. Kazanji MN, Watkinson AC. Soft lining materials: their absorption of, and solubility in, artificial saliva. Br Dent J 1988;165(3):91–94. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4806516
  21. Maciel JG, Sugio CYC, de Campos Chaves G, et al. Determining acceptable limits for water sorption and solubility of interim denture resilient liners. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121(2):311–316. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.007
  22. Arima T, Murata H, Hamada T. Properties of highly cross-linked autopolymerizing reline acrylic resins. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73(1):55–59. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(05)80273-2
  23. Sadamori S, Ishii T, Hamada T. Influence of thickness on the linear dimensional change, warpage, and water uptake of a denture base resin. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10(1):35–43.
  24. Akin H, Tugut F, Mutaf B, et al. Investigation of bonding properties of denture bases to silicone-based soft denture liner immersed in isobutyl methacrylate and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6(2):121–125. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2014.6.2.121
  25. Yoshijima Y, Murakami K, Kayama S, et al. Effect of substrate surface hydrophobicity on the adherence of yeast and hyphal candida. Mycoses 2010;53(3):221–226. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.2009.01694.x
  26. Gad MM, Bahgat HA, Edrees MF, et al. Antifungal activities and some surface characteristics of denture soft liners containing silicon dioxide nanoparticles. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2022;12(1):109–116. DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_286_21
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.