Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Gingival Retraction Using Chemical and Mechanical Methods: An in Vivo Study

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this in vivo study was to compare and evaluate the clinical efficacy of two gingival retraction systems; Ultrapak and Traxodent, on the basis of the amount of gingival retraction achieved in vertical and horizontal direction and their hemorrhage control.Methods: A total of 60 subjects were selected requiring fixed prosthesis. The two gingival retraction systems were used on the prepared abutments randomly. The vertical gingival retraction was measured before and after retraction using flexible measuring strip with 0.5 mm grading. The horizontal retraction was measured on the casts poured in polysilicone impressions made before the retraction and after retraction.Results: Statistically significant difference (p<0.05) was found between the amount of the retraction (vertical and horizontal) achieved by Ultrapak as compared to Traxodent. However, in achieving hemostasis Traxodent showed better efficiency than Ultrapak (p<0.05). Conclusion:The mean retraction width and depth achieved with retraction cord (Ultrapak) was significantly greater when compared with retraction paste. Although retraction paste (Traxodent) showed bleeding index significantly less when compared to that of retraction cord (Ultrapak).

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

“…The current study results are contrary to other studies that documented that Ultrapak achieved significantly higher horizontal retraction than Traxodent 28,43 and another study reported that gingival displacement paste (Expasyl) showed better gingival sulcus widening than the retraction cord. 33 This might be due to different cord sizes, cordless material and evaluation methods.…”

Periodontium Response to Gingival Displacement

“…Kohli et al found that bleeding after retraction paste removal was statistically significantly lower compared to non-impregnated retraction cord (9). Same results were also reported in Jain AR et al study [14].…”

“…All included studies were in vivo and published in English. Different retraction methods were compared evaluating: bleeding after retraction [8][9][10]12,14], recessions [6,12,14], changes in clinical attachment level [7,13], tooth mobility [7,13], probing depth [7,13], plaque index [7,14], pain during retraction [6,13], inflammatory cytokine levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) [13] and effect on the gingival sulcular epithelium [11].…”

“…Bleeding after retraction was the main evaluation criteria for the retraction effect on periodontium. It was measured in five out of nine analyzed studies [8][9][10]13,14].…”