Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study is to compare the bond strength to denture acrylics efficacy of miconazole gel against two denture adhesives with improved retentive properties (zinc-free PoliGrip cream and Snug denture soft cushion).

Materials and methods: Eight heat-cured acrylic samples were prepared measuring 0.7 cm x 1.4 cm flat tested surface. The two well-adapted tested surfaces were matched and fixed to Universal Testing Machine clamp. Vertical separating load was applied at a rate of 1 mm/min to yield the maximum load before denture adhesive failure occurs. These measurements were used to express the retention bond strength when improved denture adhesive material was applied alone in comparison with micon-azole nitrate gel. Results were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistical analysis at p-value of < 0.05.

Results: There was a statistically significant reduction in the mean tensile strength when the antifungal gel was opposed by the zinc-free PoliGrip cream. However, such a significant difference was not evident when the Snug denture cushion was opposed by the miconazole gel.

Conclusion: The addition of antifungal gel to denture adhesives reduces retentive bond strength of denture adhesives to denture acrylics. However, if an antifungal gel has to be used, then a denture adhesive cushion soft plastic liner may provide a better retentive option than denture adhesive cream.

Clinical significance: The incorporation of an antifungal agent into denture adhesives is required in many denture patients to suppress fugal growth and eliminate the undesirable health effects associated with such infections.

Keywords: Antifungal denture adhesives, Antifungal miconazole nitrate, Denture adhesive retention, Snug denture cushion, Zinc-free PoliGrip cream.

How to cite this article: Basunbul GI, BinMahfooz AM, El-Din Amin KK, Altassan MM, Qutub OA, Bukhary SMN. Effects of using Antifungal Gel on Retentive Bond Strength of Two Forms of Denture Adhesives: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018;19(8):943-948.

Source of support: Nil

Conflict of interest: None