Comparison between relining of ill-fitted maxillary complete denture versus CAD/CAM milling of new one regarding patient satisfaction, denture retention and adaptation
2025

Comparing Denture Relining Methods for Patient Satisfaction

Sample size: 12 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Kamal Maha Nagy Mohamed

Primary Institution: British University in Egypt (BUE)

Hypothesis

There are no significant differences between digitally and conventionally constructed dentures regarding denture retention and adaptation and patient satisfaction.

Conclusion

Relined maxillary dentures showed better retention, esthetics, and denture adaptation with lower cost than digitally constructed maxillary dentures.

Supporting Evidence

  • Both groups were satisfied with their dentures regarding retention, chewing ability, and speech.
  • Group B (relined dentures) showed significantly higher retention values than Group A (digitally constructed dentures) at all follow-up periods.
  • Relined dentures showed better oral tissue adaptation than digitally constructed dentures.

Takeaway

This study looked at two ways to fix loose dentures: one way is to add new material to the old denture, and the other is to make a new one using a computer. The first way worked better for keeping the denture in place and looking good.

Methodology

Twelve edentulous patients were selected, and their loose maxillary complete dentures were either relined conventionally or replaced with CAD/CAM milled dentures. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire, and retention values were measured at insertion and two weeks later.

Limitations

The study was limited to a small sample size and specific patient demographics, which may not be generalizable.

Participant Demographics

Twelve edentulous patients, both males and females, with loose maxillary complete dentures.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.001

Confidence Interval

95% CI: (0.46, 0.48)

Statistical Significance

p<0.001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/s12903-024-05298-z

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication