Clinical comparative evaluation of different retraction systems in gingival displacement and their influence on periodontal health: A randomized clinical trial

Beleidy, Marwa; Elddien, Asma M. Serag

doi:10.21608/edj.2020.26079.1076

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The values obtained for the cotton-based retraction cord (Ultrapak) agree with values obtained in previous studies by Al Hamad et al [ 12 ], Madaan et al [ 17 ], Chaudhari et al [ 20 ], and Gajbhiye et al [ 22 ]. Our results also are in agreement with the results obtained between the 2 investigated materials after retraction [ 12 , 17 , 20 , 22 , 39 ]. While differences of mean values are attributed to different methods and techniques (mid-section versus 4 or 6 surfaces on the tooth) of sulcus width evaluation, the outcome of the result remains same.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer)

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The present study aimed to compare the clinical performance and gingival sulcus width changes in partially edentulous patients using cotton and polymer gingival retraction cords. Material/Methods:Fifty partially edentulous patients were divided into 2 groups (Gp C and Gp P) and were subjected to single crown/fixed partial denture treatment. Clinical parameters, including plaque index scores, placement time, and hemorrhage control scores, were assessed. Gingival sulcus width changes before and after retraction were evaluated using individual type 4 dental stone dies observed under an optical microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using dependent/independent t tests. Results:The mean placement time, hemorrhage control time, and hemorrhagic scores were lower in Gp P than in Gp C, indicating better clinical performance of polymer-based retraction cord. Both groups showed an increase in sulcus width after retraction, but Gp P had a significantly higher sulcus width (690.03±45.37) compared to Gp C (471.38±28.13). The mean difference in sulcus width between baseline and after retraction was also significantly higher in Gp P (525.84 micrometers) than in Gp C (309.11 micrometers). Conclusions:The present study shows that polymer-based cords produce more sulcus width and have better clinical performance compared to cotton-based gingival retraction cords. These results suggest that the use of polymerbased retraction cords can improve the quality of dental impressions in partially edentulous patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Our results also show that polymer-based cord took less time for placement (Gp C 157.1 versus Gp P 140.3). Our results for Ultrapak retraction cord (cotton) show similar placement time values as in earlier [6,12,17] and recent [39] studies.…”

Section: Clinical Parameterssupporting

confidence: 90%

A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer)

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Egypt, 20 Indonesia 24 and Iran. 13 Twelve studies 2,10,12-14,20-23,26-28 reported the teeth treated in the studies (incisors, canines, premolars and molars).…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the exception of Gupta et al,11 and Sachdev et al,28 who used dry cords and those of Beleidy et al,20 and Jain et al,12 who Effectiveness of cordless techniques in gingival displa-cement. A systematic review and meta-analysis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of cordless techniques in gingival displacement. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cruzado-Oliva,

Arbildo-Vega,

Infantes-Ruíz

et al. 2023

J Oral Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the conventional technique and cordless technique in gingival displacement. Materials and Methods: A bibliographic search was carried out until August 2023, in the biomedical databases: Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane Library, Scielo, Scopus and Google Scholar. Included studies reporting the gingival displacement of vital teeth using the cordless and con-ventional techniques comprised clinical trials, articles in English and without time limits. The RoB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of the included studies and the GRADEPro GDT tool to assess the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendation of the results. Results: The preliminary search yielded a total of 489 articles, discarding those that did not meet the selection criteria, leaving only 15 articles. A total of fourteen articles entered a meta-analysis. It was found that the conventional technique caused better gingival (width) displacement than the cordless techniques, however, it caused more bleeding. Furthermore, among the wireless techniques, the one using polyvinylsiloxane obtained better results. Conclusions: The literature reviewed suggests that the conventional technique resulted in a better gingival displacement (width) than the cordless techniques, however, it causes a greater periodontal injury. Keywords: Periodontal Diseases; Oral Surgical Procedures; Gingiva; Gingival Recession; Systematic Review; Meta-analysis

show abstract

“…Clinicians typically describe a lengthy placement process, as well as pain, bleeding, and induction of an acute gingival injury. Additionally, packing the cord into the sulcus may result in biological width violation and junctional epithelium injury, which can cause gingival recession, bone resorption, and even infection (Beleidy and Serag Elddien, 2020). Both methods are technique-sensitive, costly, and timeconsuming.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Different Intraoperative Patient Preference Factors on Sub-Gingival Clamps Versus Retraction Cord Placement in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions

KHAN,

PARVEEN,

ASHAR

et al. 2023

Biol Clin Sci Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare two gingival displacement and isolation techniques: rubber dam with sub-gingival clamps and retraction cord with cotton rolls. The study also assessed the factors influencing patients' preference for one method, including the need for anesthesia, gingival bleeding, gingival laceration, post-operative spontaneous sensitivity, and time consumption. The study was conducted as a randomized control trial with 34 patients, each with one pair of comparable non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) on opposing sides of the same arch. A total of 68 restorations were placed, with each patient receiving one restoration using a retraction cord with cotton rolls (RC/CR) and the other using a rubber dam (RD) with sub-gingival clamps. Four dentists with at least five years of clinical experience under the supervision of two dental consultants with more than 14 years of clinical experience carried out the procedures to ensure uniformity in technique and assessment. The preferences of the patients were noted, and gingival bleeding, gingival laceration, spontaneous sensitivity, time consumed to apply RD and RC/CR, and the need for anesthesia were recorded immediately after the procedure. Two weeks later, gingival laceration and gingival bleeding were assessed again. Statistical analysis was performed on each criterion evaluated using a t-test, Chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney test with a significance level of P ≤ 0.05. The results showed statistically significant differences between the RD group and the RC/CR group in terms of patients' preference (P=0.0000), post-operative gingival laceration (P=0.0032), need for anesthesia (P=0.0000), and time of application (P=0.0000). 76% of patients preferred rubber dams with sub-gingival clamps. Gingival laceration, discomfort, and increased time of application were recorded in the RC/CR group. Spontaneous sensitivity reported by patients post-operatively (P=0.7204), gingival tissue laceration assessed after two weeks (P=1.0000), and gingival bleeding assessed immediately (P=0.6891) and in follow-up visits (P=1.0000) were insignificant in both groups. In conclusion, patients preferred rubber dam with sub-gingival clamps due to more comfort, lesser gingival tissue injury, and lesser time of application.

show abstract

Clinical comparative evaluation of different retraction systems in gingival displacement and their influence on periodontal health: A randomized clinical trial

Cited by 5 publications

References 37 publications

A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer)

A Clinical Study of 50 Partially Edentulous Patients with Fixed Partial Denture Restorations to Compare Clinical Parameters and Changes in Gingival Sulcus Width After Displacement with 2 Different Gingival Retraction Cord Materials (Cotton and Polymer)

Effectiveness of cordless techniques in gingival displacement. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluation of Different Intraoperative Patient Preference Factors on Sub-Gingival Clamps Versus Retraction Cord Placement in Non-Carious Cervical Lesions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About