Vol. 11, Issue 4, Part A (2025)

Purpose: This in vivo study aimed to evaluate and compare the retention of maxillary denture bases fabricated using border molding with conventional low-fusing impression compound and light-cure resin material, objectively measured using a digital force gauge. 
Materials and Methods: Completely edentulous patients requiring complete denture prostheses in the department of prosthodontics, crown and bridge govt. dental college and hospital were included in the study. In this study we performed Border molding techniques using conventional technique for (Group 1) and with light-cure acrylic for (Group 2). Both techniques were used in same patient and by same operator to minimize variability. Further, Secondary impressions was made using light-body addition silicone for light cure acrylic trays and for conventional method zinc oxide eugenol paste was used. The obtained impressions were poured with type III dental stone and casts were retrieved. Retention of the denture bases fabricated on the casts were measured using a digital force gauge intraorally, and results were statistically analyzed using the paired t-test with additional analysis for effect size and confidence intervals. 
Results: The retention values for maxillary denture bases fabricated using light-cure resin were higher than those using conventional low-fusing impression compound. Statistically, there was a difference between the two groups (t = -3.12, p = 0.0054), with light-cure resin showing a mean increase in retention of 1.30 N (0.13 kgf) compared to the standard compound. The 95% confidence interval (CI) ranged from -2.15 N to -0.45 N, indicating a measurable advantage of light-cure resin. However, the effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.47) suggests that the difference, while statistically significant, may have limited clinical relevance. 
Conclusion: This study demonstrated that both conventional and light-cure border molding techniques provided clinically acceptable retention for maxillary denture bases. The light-cure resin exhibited statistically significant higher retention values. However, the handling advantages of light-cure resin, including ease of adaptation, time efficiency, and elimination of multiple heating cycles, make it an attractive alternative for clinicians seeking streamlined procedures. Future research should focus on assessing long-term clinical performance, patient comfort, and cost-effectiveness to establish its broader clinical applicability.