SECTIONEDITORS

I__!
*.

Liquid-supported
dentures.
preliminary
report
Gert
Care1
ACTA

Boere,

D.D.S.,*

L. Davidson,
University

Hans

de

Koomen,

Part
Ph.D.,**

II: Clinical

study,

a

and

Ph.D.***
of Amsterdam

and Free

TTniversity.

Amsterdam,

The

Netherlands

A clinical
study
was made
of 11 selected
patients
wearing
liquid-supported
dentures.
The experiences
and opinions
of the patients
were
assembled
and the
results
are discussed.
The most important
conclusions
of this study
are that it is
possible
to make
a liquid-supported
denture
that in general
fits and feels comfortable, has proper
retention,
a slightly
diminished
masticatory
function,
and that can
provide
a solution
to some problematic
prosthodontic
situations.
(J PROSTHET
DENT
1989;62:434-6.)

D

urmg the past few decades the application
of soft
lining materials has proved to be a useful aid in preserving
or regaining the health of denture-supporting
tissues.‘y2
However, shortcomings
of these materials have been reported for as long as they have been in use.3 A new alternative is the liquid-supported
denture described in Part I
of this study.4
This study investigated
the clinical performance
of a
liquid-supported
denture. Functional
properties, such as
retention, stability, and tissue response in the supporting
tissues were studied.5 In addition, the patients’ appreciation of comfort and functioning
of the liquid-support,ed
denture and its durability
were examined.

MATERIAL

AND

METHODS

A group of 11 volunteers with a variety of prosthodontic
situations was selected. They were experienced
denture
wearers in the age range of 35 to 72 years. The group
included (1) six patients with complete dentures, (2) two
patients with a complete maxillary denture and a complete
natural mandibular
dentition, (3) two patients with a complete maxillary
denture and a tooth-supported
partial
mandibular
denture, and (4) one patient with a complete
mandibular
denture and a partial maxillary
denture.
In this group of 11 patients, three had problems with
their dentures, one suffered from chronic pain caused by
loading forces on the mandibular
ridge (support problem),

*Research
Associate,
Department
of Dental Materials
Science and
general practitioner.
**Professor
and Chairman,
Department
of Prosthetic
Dentistry.
***Professor
and Chairman,
Department
of Dental Materials
Science.

10/l/17026
434

one experienced chronic pain at the incisive foramen in a
resorbed alveolar process, and one patient did not wear a
mandibular
denture because of adaptation difficulties. The
other eight patients had no specific prosthodontic
problems and could function well with their dentures. The degree of resorption
and firmness of the residual alveolar
ridge differed among the patients.
To test the applicability,
15 liquid-supported
dentures
were made in the following categories.
A. Maxillary
and mandibular
liquid-supported
dentures were made for four patients (one was the
patient with chronic mandibular
pain).
B. Maxillary
liquid-supported
dentures opposing the
natural dentition or tooth-supported
removable partial dentures were made for four patients. In the patient with the painful palate, a liquid-supported
denture was made opposing an existing conventional
mandibular
denture.
C. For two patients,
only a mandibular
liquid-supported denture was made; one patient had the mandibular denture made opposing a gingivally
supported partial denture and the other patient (with
the adaptation
difficulty), opposing a complete denture.
To , /obtain answers to questions regarding retention, stability, supporting
area, and appreciation,
a questionnaire
solicited the opinions and experiences of these patients.
Some questions were designed to compare the conventional
denture with the liquid-supported
denture. The patients
were seen regularly for oral inspection of the supporting
areas. At the same time, the dentures were checked for
leakage, and the condition
of the foil and fluid was
inspected.

RESULTS
The results of the questionnaires
are summarized in Table I. From the inquiry and our own observations, the following statements can be made.
1. The retention
of the liquid-supported
denture did not
APRIL1990

VOLUME63

NUMBER4

In general. stability. indicating that the quality of the joint must be improved. 2. are being studied. The problems decreased gradually or disappeared as the patient grew accustomed to the movement. The liquid-supported denture is more voluminous and more ponderous than a conventional denture. 6. sup. Pressure spots were neither indicated by the patients nor observed. +. speech. mastication. despite its degree of freedom. 435 . They found their pain problems solved. When the bolus of food was at one side. Opinions and experiences of patients concerning liquid-supported Patient No. mastication caused problems. six showed partial rupture at the joint. Several adhesives have been tried and one or two are promising. The patients with firm ridges and the patients with a liquid-supported denture opposite the partial natural dentition needed a longer time to adapt. sta. patients with a partial natural dentition in the mandible found this phenomenon somewhat annoying. comfort without any loading forces. DISCUSSION The evaluation by the patients was used to determine some of the properties and possibilities of the liquid-supOF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY 0 1 0 1 0 0 + Ret. The negative remarks made by two patients were probably because of the difference in arrangement of the anterior teeth compared with the arrangement in the former denture. 4. In two patients. even more so because the former denture. Nearly all patients appreciated the smooth feeling of the liquid-supported denture base. distinction compared with the former conventional denture. In seven dentures a leakage developed. The patients with maxillary and mandibular dentures (not necessarily both liquid-supported dentures) had fewer problems than the patients with a denture opposing the partial natural dentition. with which the liquid-supported denture was compared. supporting area.LIQUID-SUPPORTED Table DENTURES. except the patients with the pain problems. The other patients showed no noticeable differences in the condition of the oral tissues. PART II I. positive ported denture. retention. was acceptable to patients with resorbed ridges or flabby ridges. 5. In some patients. in six dentures the joint between foil and denture coat separated because of failure of attachment of the foil. The conclusion of several studie& 7 was that the relation between satisfaction of patients with their dentures and the quality of the dentures is often ambiguous and as such has questionable worth. the patients noticed only a difference in softness of the denture base. To improve the stability. the condition of the supporting tissues seemed to improve. denture. In the dentures where the joint was damaged. the influence of other liquids and the outline of the liquid space. Most patients had some problems with mastication with the liquid-supported denture. but this factor did not influence speech or comfort. -. especially in the maxillary denture. This problem was more pronounced in the maxillary denture than in the mandibular denture. mas. The patient with the adaptation problem was able to wear this denture 6 hours per day. category and Maxillary Ret Sta SUP t 0 - 0 + 0 0 0 + 0 0 + Mas Sw Rep 0 - 0 1 + 0 1 ++ + 0 Corn denture 1 (A) 2 (A) 3 (A) 4 (A) 5 (B) 6 (B) 7 (B) + + + + Mandibular 1 (A) + 0 0 0 + 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 2 0 (A) (A) (C) (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + ++ + cause specific difficulties. 3. no difference. In one denture the foil ruptured. The comfort of the liquid-supported denture was one of the main advantages and was appreciated as such. 0. the retention was comparable to a conventional denture. The stability of the liquid-supported denture. probably because the conventional denture also showed mobility in functioning. and the cause was unknown. had been accepted. Few patients had problems with speech. 7. All of the patients noticed the mobility of the denture. Of the seven dentures with leakage. corn. The pain problems that had been solved returned when a leakage occurred. Seven of the 11 patients noticed improved retention. However. number with former conventional of repairs. negative distinction compared JOURNAL 1 -- 0 denture 2 (Al THE 0 ++ 8 (B) 9 (B) 3 4 10 11 dentures 0 spe. the denture tended to be dislodged. rep.

Heartwell CM. 7351. Syllabus of complete dentures.63:303-6. Scanning electron microscopic inspection showed no corrosion. phone (860) 325-4177..Jne rupture of the foil. DAVUXON SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY. Louis. 4th ed. The foil base does not cause observable irritation of the supporting tissues. There were six leakages at the joint ar . 3. Flogel for his advice in this study. 4. Copies are shipped within 30 days after publication of the last issue in the volume. Patients with a maxillary liquid-supported denture and a natural rn~dib~~ dentition found this floating freedom unpleasant.87(Suppl 18):45-54. 7th ed. Shipping charges are included. Netherlands Dent J 1980. Davidson CL. 7. Part I: theoretical and technical considerations. the patients noticed only a difference in softness of the base material. CONCLUSIONS 6. 436 APRIL 1990 VOLUME68 NUMBER4 . Utrecht: State University of Utrecht. Circulation Department. and all advertising is removed. Dentures. Some contamination and discoloration of the foil was observed. Boucher CO. Use of tissue conditioners and reailient liners. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger. Patients with resorbed or flabby ridges did not mind. Bound volumes available thank Professor G. Gonzales JB. Payment must accompany all orders. Reprint requests to: DR. 3. Undo OF A~~~~ ACTA LcuwFawRG 1 1066 EA AMSTERDAM THE NETHERLAWS to subscribers Bound volumes of the JOURNAL OF PROSTHBTIC DENTISTRY are available to subscribers (only) for the 1989 issues from the publisher at a cost of $44.ANDDAVIDSON When the joint between the foil and denture coat was damaged. We After a period of 1 year in which patients have worn or are still wearing one or two liquid-supported dentures some conclusions can be drawn. 1985. The stability of the denture is different compared with a conventional denture because of the fluid system. REFERENCES 1. Zarb GA. Liquid-supported dentures. ext. Bound volumes are not available in place of a regular JOURNAL subscription. Mosby Co. Dent Clin North Am 197~2~249-59. St. 1986507-44. and year stamped in gold on the spine. The binding is durable buckram with the journal name. Ping Chaing BK. They neither tasted nor noticed the silicone fluid.00 international) for Vol. mKOOMEN. USA. 62 (Joy-December~. 5. 61 (Janu~y-June) and Vol. Polymers in the service of prosthetic dentistry. volume number. 3 Dent 1984$2:203-14. Problems of patients with chronic pain were solved. Waas MAJ van. The techniques and materials are still subject to improvements. 2. Boere G. 4. It is possible to make a denture with a liquid as a supporting medium. 19’75. a question of ‘grinning and bearing”) [Thesis]. Prosthodontic treatment for edentulous patients. Subscriptions must be in force to qualify. een kwestie van doorbijten (artificial teeth. happy ventures. MO 63146-3318. Hickey JC.00 ($56. St Louis: CV Moaby Co. Volumes 59 and 60 are also available.3. J PROSTHZT DENT 1989. V. The retention of this denture is comparable to the retention of a conventional denture. 5. CAREL L. Ben k~stgebit. 11830 Westline Industrial Drive.BOERE. 6. 2. The life span of the liquid-supported denture depends on the atts~hment of the foil. Contact The C. Time is needed to become used to the changes in mastication. Each bound volume contains a subject and author index. 1. Patients with firm alveolar ridges or (partial) natural dentition wearing a liquid-supported denture experienced a diminished masticatory function. The liquid-supported denture is comfortable for the patient and can improve some prosthodontic problems. 7. E. Kalk W. Rahn AO.