medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-462X (Print)
Organo de divulgación Científica de la Unidad Académica de Odontología de la Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit (UAN)

2018, Number 20

<< Back Next >>

Rev Tame 2018; 6.7 (20)

Retención en impresiones funcionales para prótesis totales superiores tomadas con hidrocoloide irreversible y poliéter

Estrada VCM, Navarro VM, De la Fuente CLP, Martínez MMA, Favela FS, Barocio TMÁ, Delgadillo BJL

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 777-781
PDF size: 236.55 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine if there is a significant difference in the retention of physiological impressions taken with polyether compared to impressions taken with irreversible hydrocolloid. Materials and methods: Quantitative, experimental and cross-sectional study, carried out on 30 patients who attended the Torreón Unit of Dentistry at the Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila from January to June 2015, average age: 70.2 years, totally edentulous in the upper arch, with or without torus or exostosis in the alveolar process of the lower jaw, partially or totally edentulous in the lower arch. The participants signed an informed consent. Results: On average, the force required to pull the impressions with hydrocolloid was 3.10 kg and using polyether was 2.78 kg. Both analysis of variance, F (1,58) = 0.21117, p = 0.6476, and a two-tailed paired T-test, t (58) = 1.1091, p = 0.2720, showed that there is no significant difference between the forces required to pull the impressions when using hydrocolloid or polyether.


REFERENCES

  1. Secretaría de Salud. Resultados del Sistema de Vigilancia Epidemiológica de Patologías Bucales SIVEPAB 2015. México: Secretaría de Salud; 2012. [Internet; consultado 1º de febrero del 2018]. Disponible en: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/212323/SIVEPAB-2015.pdf

  2. Fernández-Barrera M, Medina-Solís C, Márquez-Corona M, Vera-Guzmán S, Ascencio-Villagrán A, Minaya-Sánchez M, Casanova-Rosado A. Edentulismo en adultos de Pachuca, México: aspectos sociodemográficos y socioeconómicos. Rev Clin Periodoncia Implantol Rehabil Oral. 2016, 9 (1):59-65.

  3. Luengas-Aguirre M, Sáenz-Martínez L, Tenorio-Torres G, Garcilazo-Gómez A, Díaz-Franco M. Aspectos sociales y biológicos del edentulismo en México: un problema visible de las inequidades en salud. Ciencias Clínicas. 2015, 16 (2):29-36.

  4. Carlsson G, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2010, 37:143–156.

  5. Limpuangthip N, Somkotra T, Arksornnukit M. Modified retention and stability criteria for complete denture wearers: A risk assessment tool for impaired masticatory ability and oral health-related quality of life. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, En prensa, prueba corregida. Disponible en línea: 29 de noviembre del 2017.

  6. Rubilar F, Jiménez L, Rochefort C. Retención y estabilidad de bases prostéticas superiores obtenidas a partir de dos técnicas de impresión utilizadas en la rehabilitación de desdentados totales con prótesis total. Revista Dental de Chile. 2009, 100 (1):4-12.

  7. Galaz S, Miranda F, García O, Acosta H, Carrasco L. Estudio comparativo de la retención en prótesis totales superiores elaboradas en impresiones de Alginato y Pasta Zinquenólica. Revista Dental de Chile. 2012, 103 (2):23-28.

  8. Rizk F. Effect of Different Border Molding Materials on Complete Denture Retention. Cairo Dental Journal. 2008, 24 (3), 415-420.

  9. Yegin E, Akpinar Y, Yavuz T, Aslan M. Effect of different denture adhesives on retention of complete dentures: an in vivo study. Journal of Adhesion Science & Technology. 2017; 31 (18):2044-2052.

  10. De Baat C, Van’t Hof M, Van Zeghbroeck L, Özcan M, Kalk W. An international multicenter study on the effectiveness of a denture adhesive in maxillary dentures using disposable gnathometers. Clin Oral Invest. 2007; 11: 237-243.

  11. Kumar M, Thombare R. A Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Various Denture Adhesives Available in Market on the Retentive Ability of the Maxillary Denture: An In Vivo Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2011; 11 (2):82–88.

  12. Pachore N, Patel J, Sethuraman R, Naveen Y. A Comparative Analysis of the Effect of Three Types of Denture Adhesives on the Retention of Maxillary Denture Bases: An In Vivo Study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014; 14 (4):369–375.

  13. AlHelal A, AlRumaih H, Kattadiyil M, Baba N, Charles J, Goodacre, C. J. Comparison of retention between maxillary milled and conventional denture bases: A clinical study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2017; 117 (2):233-238.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com