
doi: 10.1111/scd.12562
pmid: 33438306
AbstractAimThe objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of denture adhesives (DAs) in completely edentulous denture wearers compared to not using DAs.Methods and ResultsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from the database inception up to 6 February 2020 for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) involving patients with complete dentures in both arches where the use of DAs was compared to no use of DAs. A total of 497 abstracts were reviewed, resulting in inclusion of 10 RCTs. Outcomes reported in the included trials were thoroughly reviewed and tabulated. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used. All 10 studies were assessed at unclear (10%) or high risk of bias (90%). Studies showed DAs improved mainly retention/stability, and masticatory/chewing ability/performance, compared to no adhesives.ConclusionMost studies showed favorable results for DAs on retention and stability of complete dentures, masticatory performance, patient's comfort and satisfaction. Due to the heterogeneity of the outcomes, unclear/high risk of bias and small sample sizes, the quality of the evidence was very low. More high‐quality research is needed with improved blinding and use of standardized methods to evaluate the efficacy of DAs.
Denture, Complete, Patient Satisfaction, Dental Cements, Humans, Mastication, Mouth, Edentulous
Denture, Complete, Patient Satisfaction, Dental Cements, Humans, Mastication, Mouth, Edentulous
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 11 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
