- Email: [email protected]
Evaluation of a new denture bath solution
&wms S. Qraaata, DIIS,a
and Rsbert Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Tex.
S.
Stallanou, DDS, MSb
Soft liners often lose their reeiliencyt perhaps a6 a result of oxidizing cleaning solutions and/or in5Itration with C&d& a&ems. This projeut tested a new denture bath solution and its &e&s on liiers treated with oxidizing solutions and with Ca&&Zu inoemW&oa. It appears that this denture bath soiution has a definite softening effect on these iiners. (J PROWMET DENT 1991;66:799-1.)
C oncern has been expressed regarding the hardening effect of oxidizing denture cleansers on temporary and processed soft denture liners. Some consider this an inherent problem of all soft liners; others say it is due to infiltration of the reline material by Candida albicans colonies, which seem to impart a hardening effect.l, 2 %hairman, Department of Removable Prosthodontics. bChairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics. 1011/26671
METHODS
AND MATERIAL
To test these effects, a study was designed in two phases
Phase I Five samples of 10 soft reline materials (both processec and temporary) were alternately cycled in Efferdenl (Warner-Lambert, Morris Plains, N.J.), an oxidiziq cleanser, for 12 hours and tap water for 12 hours each daJ for a lo-week period. The samples were then tested fol surface hardness with a Durometer (VWR Scientific, Irv,
Table I. Test materials for reline samples (in grams) Reline
materials
1. Coe Soft* Coe Labs. Inc. Chicago, Iii. 2. Vinasoft * Virine Taunton, Mass. 3. Soft Tone* H. J. Rosworth Co. Skokie, Ill. 4. Pro Ter Pro Tech Dental Products Centerarch, N.Y. 5. Softek 49 Huntington Dent. & Med. Co.. New York, N.Y. 6. Dura Soft Astra Dental Corp. Wheeling. Ill. 7. Royal II Factor I1 Lakeside. Ariz. 8. Proiastic,
Prtrtastic Co.. Inc. Hoches&r. N.Y. 9. Soft Neotone Ncoloy Products Co. Posen, II! 10. Moiioplast Regneri GM3H & Co. KG Karlsruhe, Germany ‘! vmporary soft liners.
Efferdent
HZ0
Oral
Safe
Broth
Candida
Oral Safe rejuvenation
350
350
250
350
305
225
475
425
460
435
435
375
710
520
660
630
660
600
550
460
500
550
560
430
550
430
475
500
480
435
500
480
460
510
550
450
1250
575
625
660
680
525
300
305
300
290
350
310
475
405
450
Lost
450
325
425
405
400
425
405
410
EVALUATION
Table
II.
OF DENTURE
Statistical
Source Columns Rows Inter Error
Sum of square 6.9 1.3 5.7 3.8
x x x x
BATH
SOLUTION
DISCUSSION
analysis (two-way ANOVA) Degree of freedom
Mean square
F statistic
5 9 45 240
1.3 x 106 1.4 x 10s 1.2 x 10s 1600
869
lo6 107 107 lo5
919 790
Tukey’s multiple comparison test: CV = 72. Level of significance p 0.05.
ing, Tex.) instrument using the tap water samples as controls. The results are shown in Table I. In all but two samples, the Efferdent cleanser hardened the soft liner. The Efferdent cleanser samples were then placed in Oral Safe (Great Lakes Orthodontics, Tonawanda, N.Y.) cleanser for 2 weeks. In all except one instance the material was significantly softened (Table I).
CONCLUSION
Phase II Five samples of the same 10 soft liners (both processed and temporary) were placed in a broth inoculated with Candida albicans for 8 weeks. The same number of samples was placed in broth without inoculation with Candida albicans. Both mixtures exhibited a hardening effect on the soft liners when tested with the Durometer instrument. The Candida-inoculated broth usually showed more hardening effect when compared with tap water (Table I). These same samples were then placed in Oral Safe cleanser for 2 weeks and again tested for surface hardness (Table I). The Oral Safe cleanser treatment resulted in a definite softening of all except one material (Molloplast). Of the materials tested, Prolastic and Molloplast seem the least affected by external causes. All others showed softening when placed in Oral Safe after exposure in Efferdent, C. albicans, or broth solutions (Table I). Oral Safe, a new denture bath material that controls Candida albicam and bacteria, seems to preserve soft-liner integrity.
THE
JOURNAL
W h e n comparing the surface hardness of soft liners immersed in Efferdent cleanser and then placed in Oral Safe cleanser, there was a definite softening effect from the Oral Safe treatment (Table I). The differences between liners immersed in water and then immersed in Oral Safe cleanser were minimal, as would be expected (Table I). Soft liners immersed in plain broth and in Candida-inoculated broth showed little difference in surface hardness (Table I). All samples in broth categories, however, were generally harder than the water control (Table I). All samples (Efferdent cleanser, C. albicans, and broth) showed significant softening when immersed in Oral Safe cleanser (Table I). Statistical analysis with a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s multiple comparison test showed a significance level of p < 0.05 (Table II) for all samples.
OF PROSTHETIC
DENTISTRY
Oral Safe is a useful material in preserving and/or reestablishing the resiliency of denture soft liner materials. W e thank Mr. A. C. Thomas, Department of Microbiology, Baylor College of Dentistry, for his invaluable help and Great Lakes Orthodontics, Ltd., Tonawanda, N.Y. for supplying the Oral Safe cleanser used in this study. REFERENCES 1. Wendt S, et al. The infected denture: how long does it take? Quintessence Int 1987;18:855-8. 2. Kaita H, Kaminishi H, Habut, et al. The cleaning ability and fungicidal effect against Candida albicans by some denture cleansers. J Jpn Prosthodont Sot 1988,32:SO8-12 (English Abstract). Reprint requests to: DR. JAMES S. GRANATA BAYLOR COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY 3302 GASTON AVE. DALLAS, TX 75246
791
and Rsbert Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Tex.
S.
Stallanou, DDS, MSb
Soft liners often lose their reeiliencyt perhaps a6 a result of oxidizing cleaning solutions and/or in5Itration with C&d& a&ems. This projeut tested a new denture bath solution and its &e&s on liiers treated with oxidizing solutions and with Ca&&Zu inoemW&oa. It appears that this denture bath soiution has a definite softening effect on these iiners. (J PROWMET DENT 1991;66:799-1.)
C oncern has been expressed regarding the hardening effect of oxidizing denture cleansers on temporary and processed soft denture liners. Some consider this an inherent problem of all soft liners; others say it is due to infiltration of the reline material by Candida albicans colonies, which seem to impart a hardening effect.l, 2 %hairman, Department of Removable Prosthodontics. bChairman, Department of Fixed Prosthodontics. 1011/26671
METHODS
AND MATERIAL
To test these effects, a study was designed in two phases
Phase I Five samples of 10 soft reline materials (both processec and temporary) were alternately cycled in Efferdenl (Warner-Lambert, Morris Plains, N.J.), an oxidiziq cleanser, for 12 hours and tap water for 12 hours each daJ for a lo-week period. The samples were then tested fol surface hardness with a Durometer (VWR Scientific, Irv,
Table I. Test materials for reline samples (in grams) Reline
materials
1. Coe Soft* Coe Labs. Inc. Chicago, Iii. 2. Vinasoft * Virine Taunton, Mass. 3. Soft Tone* H. J. Rosworth Co. Skokie, Ill. 4. Pro Ter Pro Tech Dental Products Centerarch, N.Y. 5. Softek 49 Huntington Dent. & Med. Co.. New York, N.Y. 6. Dura Soft Astra Dental Corp. Wheeling. Ill. 7. Royal II Factor I1 Lakeside. Ariz. 8. Proiastic,
Prtrtastic Co.. Inc. Hoches&r. N.Y. 9. Soft Neotone Ncoloy Products Co. Posen, II! 10. Moiioplast Regneri GM3H & Co. KG Karlsruhe, Germany ‘! vmporary soft liners.
Efferdent
HZ0
Oral
Safe
Broth
Candida
Oral Safe rejuvenation
350
350
250
350
305
225
475
425
460
435
435
375
710
520
660
630
660
600
550
460
500
550
560
430
550
430
475
500
480
435
500
480
460
510
550
450
1250
575
625
660
680
525
300
305
300
290
350
310
475
405
450
Lost
450
325
425
405
400
425
405
410
EVALUATION
Table
II.
OF DENTURE
Statistical
Source Columns Rows Inter Error
Sum of square 6.9 1.3 5.7 3.8
x x x x
BATH
SOLUTION
DISCUSSION
analysis (two-way ANOVA) Degree of freedom
Mean square
F statistic
5 9 45 240
1.3 x 106 1.4 x 10s 1.2 x 10s 1600
869
lo6 107 107 lo5
919 790
Tukey’s multiple comparison test: CV = 72. Level of significance p 0.05.
ing, Tex.) instrument using the tap water samples as controls. The results are shown in Table I. In all but two samples, the Efferdent cleanser hardened the soft liner. The Efferdent cleanser samples were then placed in Oral Safe (Great Lakes Orthodontics, Tonawanda, N.Y.) cleanser for 2 weeks. In all except one instance the material was significantly softened (Table I).
CONCLUSION
Phase II Five samples of the same 10 soft liners (both processed and temporary) were placed in a broth inoculated with Candida albicans for 8 weeks. The same number of samples was placed in broth without inoculation with Candida albicans. Both mixtures exhibited a hardening effect on the soft liners when tested with the Durometer instrument. The Candida-inoculated broth usually showed more hardening effect when compared with tap water (Table I). These same samples were then placed in Oral Safe cleanser for 2 weeks and again tested for surface hardness (Table I). The Oral Safe cleanser treatment resulted in a definite softening of all except one material (Molloplast). Of the materials tested, Prolastic and Molloplast seem the least affected by external causes. All others showed softening when placed in Oral Safe after exposure in Efferdent, C. albicans, or broth solutions (Table I). Oral Safe, a new denture bath material that controls Candida albicam and bacteria, seems to preserve soft-liner integrity.
THE
JOURNAL
W h e n comparing the surface hardness of soft liners immersed in Efferdent cleanser and then placed in Oral Safe cleanser, there was a definite softening effect from the Oral Safe treatment (Table I). The differences between liners immersed in water and then immersed in Oral Safe cleanser were minimal, as would be expected (Table I). Soft liners immersed in plain broth and in Candida-inoculated broth showed little difference in surface hardness (Table I). All samples in broth categories, however, were generally harder than the water control (Table I). All samples (Efferdent cleanser, C. albicans, and broth) showed significant softening when immersed in Oral Safe cleanser (Table I). Statistical analysis with a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s multiple comparison test showed a significance level of p < 0.05 (Table II) for all samples.
OF PROSTHETIC
DENTISTRY
Oral Safe is a useful material in preserving and/or reestablishing the resiliency of denture soft liner materials. W e thank Mr. A. C. Thomas, Department of Microbiology, Baylor College of Dentistry, for his invaluable help and Great Lakes Orthodontics, Ltd., Tonawanda, N.Y. for supplying the Oral Safe cleanser used in this study. REFERENCES 1. Wendt S, et al. The infected denture: how long does it take? Quintessence Int 1987;18:855-8. 2. Kaita H, Kaminishi H, Habut, et al. The cleaning ability and fungicidal effect against Candida albicans by some denture cleansers. J Jpn Prosthodont Sot 1988,32:SO8-12 (English Abstract). Reprint requests to: DR. JAMES S. GRANATA BAYLOR COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY 3302 GASTON AVE. DALLAS, TX 75246
791