Adverse Effects on PMMA Caused by Mechanical and Combined Methods of Denture Cleansing

This study evaluated the abrasiveness of mechanical and combined methods of denture hygiene, by the analysis of mass loss and surface roughness. Acrylic resin specimens (Plexiglass) were brushed by a tooth brushing machine (Mavtec) with a soft brush (Tek) and water (control) or four dentifrices (Sorriso, Colgate, Polident and Corega) (Experimental groups) for 50 min, representing one year of brushing (mechanical method). After brushing, the specimens were immersed in 0.5% sodium hypochlorite simulating a daily cleaning of 20 min for one year (combined method). Distilled water (23 ºC) was employed as control. The mass loss (g) was analyzed by an analytical balance and the surface roughness (μm) by a rugosimeter. Data were subjected to ANOVA and Bonferroni test (α=0.05). Polident dentifrice showed lowest values of mass loss for both methods (mechanical: -0.0072±0.0017, combined:-0.011±0.002) and the combined method resulted in greater mass loss than the mechanical, except for Corega. For the surface roughness, after the mechanical method, the lowest values were registered for water (-0.007±0.016) and Polident (0.402±0.378); for the combined method, water (-0.063±0.013) showed the lowest values; there was no statistically significant difference between methods. It was concluded that Polident was the less abrasive dentifrice and the association between chemical and mechanical methods increased the mass loss but did not change the surface roughness of specimens.

Este estudo avaliou a abrasividade causada pelos métodos mecânico e combinado de higiene de próteses totais, por meio da análise da perda de massa e rugosidade de superfície. Corpos de prova de resina acrílica (Plexiglass) foram escovados em máquina de escovação (Mavtec) com escova macia (Tek) e água ou dentifrícios (Sorriso, Colgate, Polident e Corega) (Grupos Experimentais) por 50 min, simulando 1 ano de escovação (método mecânico). Após a escovação, os corpos de prova foram imersos em hipoclorito de sódio a 0,5%, simulando imersões diárias de 20 min por 1 ano (método combinado). Água destilada (23 °C) foi empregada como controle. A perda de massa foi analisada por meio de balança analítica de precisão (g) e a rugosidade de superfície por rugosímetro (μm). Os dados foram submetidos à ANOVA e teste de Bonferroni (α=0,05). Em relação à perda de massa, os menores valores foram obtidos para o Polident em ambos os métodos (mecânico: -0,0072±0,0017; combinado: -0,011±0,002) e o método combinado resultou em maior perda de massa que o método mecânico, exceto para o Corega. Para a rugosidade de superfície, após aplicação do método mecânico, os valores mais baixos foram registrados para água (-0,007±0,016) e Polident (0,402±0,378); para o método combinado, os valores mais baixos foram obtidos para água (-0,063±0,013); não houve diferença estatística entre os métodos. Conclui-se que o Polident foi o dentifrício menos abrasivo e que a associação do método químico ao método mecânico aumentou a perda de massa, porém não alterou a rugosidade de superfície dos corpos de prova.

Complete denture biofilm after brushing with specific denture paste, neutral soap and artificial saliva.

This study compared the levels of biofilm in maxillary and mandibular complete dentures and evaluated the number of colony-forming units (cfu) of yeasts, after using auxiliary brushing agents and artificial saliva. Twenty-three denture wearers with hyposalivation and xerostomia were instructed to brush the dentures 3 times a day during 3 weeks with the following products: Corega Brite denture dentifrice, neutral liquid soap, Corega Brite combined with Oral Balance (artificial saliva) or tap water. For biofilm quantification, the internal surfaces of the dentures were disclosed, photographed and measured using a software. For microbiological analysis, the biofilm was scrapped off, and the harvested material was diluted, sown in CHROMagar™ Candida and incubated at 37°C for 48 h. Data were analyzed statistically by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). Mandibular dentures presented a mean biofilm percentage (µ=26.90 ± 21.10) significantly greater than the maxillary ones (µ=18.0 ± 15.0) (p<0.05). Brushing using Corega Brite combined with Oral Balance (µ=15.87 ± 18.47) was more effective (p<0.05) than using the denture dentifrice (µ=19.47 ± 17.24), neutral soap (µ=23.90 ± 18.63) or tap water (control; µ=32.50 ± 20.68). For the microbiological analysis, the chi-square test did not indicate significant difference between the hygiene products for either type of denture. The more frequently isolated species of yeasts were C. albicans, C. tropicalis and C. glabrata. In conclusion, mandibular dentures had more biofilm formation than maxillary ones. Denture brushing with Corega Brite dentifrice combined with the use of Oral Balance was the most effective method for reduction of biofilm levels, but the use of products did not show difference in yeast cfu counts.

Complete denture biofilm after brushing with specific denture paste, neutral soap and artificial saliva

This study compared the levels of biofilm in maxillary and mandibular complete dentures and evaluated the number of colony-forming units (cfu) of yeasts, after using auxiliary brushing agents and artificial saliva. Twenty-three denture wearers with hyposalivation and xerostomia were instructed to brush the dentures 3 times a day during 3 weeks with the following products: Corega Brite denture dentifrice, neutral liquid soap, Corega Brite combined with Oral Balance (artificial saliva) or tap water. For biofilm quantification, the internal surfaces of the dentures were disclosed, photographed and measured using a software. For microbiological analysis, the biofilm was scrapped off, and the harvested material was diluted, sown in CHROMagar™ Candida and incubated at 37°C for 48 h. Data were analyzed statistically by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). Mandibular dentures presented a mean biofilm percentage (µ=26.90 ± 21.10) significantly greater than the maxillary ones (µ=18.0 ± 15.0) (p<0.05). Brushing using Corega Brite combined with Oral Balance (µ=15.87 ± 18.47) was more effective (p<0.05) than using the denture dentifrice (µ=19.47 ± 17.24), neutral soap (µ=23.90 ± 18.63) or tap water (control; µ=32.50 ± 20.68). For the microbiological analysis, the chi-square test did not indicate significant difference between the hygiene products for either type of denture. The more frequently isolated species of yeasts were C. albicans, C. tropicalis and C. glabrata. In conclusion, mandibular dentures had more biofilm formation than maxillary ones. Denture brushing with Corega Brite dentifrice combined with the use of Oral Balance was the most effective method for reduction of biofilm levels, but the use of products did not show difference in yeast cfu counts.

Este estudo comparou os níveis de biofilme em próteses totais maxilares e mandibulares, e analisou o número de unidades formadoras de colônias de leveduras, após o uso de agentes auxiliares da escovação e saliva artificial. Vinte e três usuários de próteses totais com hipossalivação e xerostomia foram orientados a escovar as dentaduras 3 vezes ao dia durante 3 semanas com os seguintes produtos: Corega Brite (dentifrício para prótese), sabonete líquido neutro, Corega Brite associado com o uso do Oral Balance (saliva artificial) ou água de torneira. Para a quantificação do biofilme, as superfícies internas das próteses totais foram evidenciadas, fotografadas e o biofilme quantificado com o auxílio de um software. Para a análise microbiológica, o biofilme foi removido por escovação, coletado, diluído, semeado em meio seletivo CHROMagar™ Candida e incubado a 37°C por 48 h. A análise de variância para dois fatores (p<0,05%) mostrou que as próteses mandibulares apresentaram uma média de porcentagem de biofilme (µ=26,90±21,10) maior que as maxilares (µ=18±15). O teste complementar de Tukey (0,46; p<5%) mostrou que a escovação com Corega Brite e Oral Balance (µ=15,87 ± 18,47) foi mais efetiva que o dentifrício (µ=19,47 ± 17,24), sabonete neutro (µ=23,90 ± 18,63), ou água de torneira (controle; µ=32,50 ± 20,68). Em relação á análise microbiológica, o teste de Qui-Quadrado não indicou diferença entre os produtos de higiene, para ambas as próteses. As espécies de leveduras mais comumente isoladas foram C. albicans, C. tropicalis e C. glabrata. Em conclusão, as próteses mandibulares apresentaram mais biofilme do que as maxilares. Além disso, a escovação das próteses com o Corega Brite associado ao uso do Oralbalance foi o método mais efetivo na redução dos níveis de biofilme, entretanto o uso dos produtos não demonstrou diferença no número de ufc de leveduras.

Abrasiveness of conventional and specific denture-cleansing dentifrices.

This study analyzed the weight loss and surface roughness caused in Plexiglass specimens by conventional dentifrices (Sorriso, Colgate and Close Up) and specific dentifrices used for cleaning of dentures (Corega and Dentu Creme). Plexiglass specimens were divided into 6 groups (n=6) including: a control (distilled water - DW) and experimental groups. Brushing was performed in a toothbrushing machine with a soft brush and a dentifrice suspension and DW according to different brushing times (50, 100, 200 and 250 min -18,000, 36,000, 72,000 and 90,000 cycles, respectively, calculated to correspond to 1, 2, 4 and 5 years of regular brushing). The results of weight loss and surface roughness were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. In all tested times, the effect of DW was insignificant. Dentifrices differed significantly from DW in the initial period. Corega dentifrice caused greater mass loss in all studied times, followed by Close Up. Dentifrices resulted in a surface roughness similar to the DW at 50 min. In the other times, Sorriso, Colgate and Corega caused more surface roughness than DW. In conclusion, specific dentifrices caused larger mass loss and lower surface roughness as conventional dentifrice.

Abrasiveness of conventional and specific denture-cleansing dentifrices

This study analyzed the weight loss and surface roughness caused in Plexiglass specimens by conventional dentifrices (Sorriso, Colgate and Close Up) and specific dentifrices used for cleaning of dentures (Corega and Dentu Creme). Plexiglass specimens were divided into 6 groups (n=6) including: a control (distilled water - DW) and experimental groups. Brushing was performed in a toothbrushing machine with a soft brush and a dentifrice suspension and DW according to different brushing times (50, 100, 200 and 250 min -18,000, 36,000, 72,000 and 90,000 cycles, respectively, calculated to correspond to 1, 2, 4 and 5 years of regular brushing). The results of weight loss and surface roughness were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s test at 5% significance level. In all tested times, the effect of DW was insignificant. Dentifrices differed significantly from DW in the initial period. Corega dentifrice caused greater mass loss in all studied times, followed by Close Up. Dentifrices resulted in a surface roughness similar to the DW at 50 min. In the other times, Sorriso, Colgate and Corega caused more surface roughness than DW. In conclusion, specific dentifrices caused larger mass loss and lower surface roughness as conventional dentifrice.

Este estudo analisou a perda de massa e rugosidade superficial causadas em corpos de prova de Plexiglass por dentifrícios convencionais (Sorriso, Colgate e Close Up) e específicos (Corega e Dentu Creme) para higienização de próteses totais. Os corpos de prova de Plexiglass foram distribuidos em 6 grupos (n=6), sendo um controle (água destilada - AD) e grupos experimentais. A escovação foi realizada em máquina de escovação com escovas macias e suspensões de dentifrícios ou AD, de acordo com os diferentes tempos de escovação (50, 100, 200 e 250 min -18.000, 36.000, 72.000 e 90.000 ciclos, respectivamente, calculados para corresponder a 1, 2, 4 e 5 anos de escovação regular). Os resultados de perda de massa e rugosidade superficial foram analisados por meio de ANOVA e teste de Tukey com 5% de significância. Em todos os tempos analisados, a AD teve efeito insignificante. Os dentifrícios diferiram significativamente da AD no período inicial. O dentifrício Corega causou maior perda de massa em todos os tempos estudados, seguido por Close Up. No tempo de 50 min, todos os dentifrícios causaram rugosidade superficial semelhante à AD. Nos outros tempos, Sorriso, Colgate e Corega causaram maior rugosidade superficial em relação à AD. Conclui-se que os dentifrícios específicos causaram maior perda de massa, porém menor rugosidade superficial que os dentifrícios convencionais.