Evaluation of Oral Mucosa Elastomers for a 3D Oral Simulation Model

(1) Background: In order to conduct in vitro studies regarding muco-supported dentures, it is necessary to have a simulation model that simulates the oral mucosa, as it is the main influencing factor for their retention and stabilisation. The aim of this study is to perform tensile and wettability tests in three different elastomers to identify the best material for simulating the oral mucosa. (2) Methods: A tensile test was performed according to ISO 527-1 and a compressive test was performed according to ISO 604:2002, at a constant speed of 10 mm/min. The E-modulus was calculated. A wettability test was performed according to ISO 19403-2. Shore A hardness was measured according to ISO 868:2003. All values were compared with the oral mucosa data. (3) Results: Tensile E-modulus calculation revealed no significant difference between Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B and EXA'lence<sup>TM</sup> Light Body. The mean drop angle calculation revealed no significant difference between Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC and Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B. The compression E-modulus showed significant differences for Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC and EXA'lence<sup>TM</sup> Light Body, while Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B showed no significant deviation. Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC has a similar Shore A hardness to the other materials. (4) Conclusions: Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B and Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC are the most similar elastomers to the alveolar mucosa.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Materials
Published
2025-05-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18112490
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.79
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of Oral Mucosa Elastomers for a 3D Oral Simulation Model

José L. Esteves, María Cristina Manzanares‐Céspedes, Aritza Brizuela‐Velasco, Joana Mendes et al.
1 citations
Materials
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
1.79
article

Evaluation of Oral Mucosa Elastomers for a 3D Oral Simulation Model

José L. Esteves, María Cristina Manzanares‐Céspedes, Aritza Brizuela‐Velasco, Joana Mendes, José Manuel Mendes, Carlos Aroso, Lara Coelho
article en
1 citations

Abstract

(1) Background: In order to conduct in vitro studies regarding muco-supported dentures, it is necessary to have a simulation model that simulates the oral mucosa, as it is the main influencing factor for their retention and stabilisation. The aim of this study is to perform tensile and wettability tests in three different elastomers to identify the best material for simulating the oral mucosa. (2) Methods: A tensile test was performed according to ISO 527-1 and a compressive test was performed according to ISO 604:2002, at a constant speed of 10 mm/min. The E-modulus was calculated. A wettability test was performed according to ISO 19403-2. Shore A hardness was measured according to ISO 868:2003. All values were compared with the oral mucosa data. (3) Results: Tensile E-modulus calculation revealed no significant difference between Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B and EXA'lence<sup>TM</sup> Light Body. The mean drop angle calculation revealed no significant difference between Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC and Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B. The compression E-modulus showed significant differences for Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC and EXA'lence<sup>TM</sup> Light Body, while Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B showed no significant deviation. Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC has a similar Shore A hardness to the other materials. (4) Conclusions: Molloplast<sup>®</sup> B and Ufi Gel<sup>®</sup> SC are the most similar elastomers to the alveolar mucosa.

MaterialsVol. 18(11)
Universidade do Porto (PT), Universidad Europea Miguel de Cervantes (ES), Cooperativa de Ensino Superior Politécnico e Universitário (PT), Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
1.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.