Efficacy of Different Gingival Displacement Materials in the Management of Gingival Sulcus Width: A Comparative Study

Rathod, Aradhana; Jacob, Sonia S; MAlqahtani, Ali; Valsan, Iris; Majeed, R.; Premnath, Arya

doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3112

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thimmappa M et al, in 2018, found that the merocel strip provided maximum vertical and horizontal retraction compared to Ultrapak Retraction Cord and Magic Foam, respectively [34]. Other authors also conducted comparative evaluations of non-invasive cordless retraction methods, which showed sufficient displacement for impression-taking [35][36][37]. Nasim H et al, 2023 [38] performed a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the conventional retraction cord method with a novel method using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparative Analysis of Post-Retraction Changes in Gingival Height after Conventional and Surgical Gingival Displacement: Rotary Curettage, Diode and Er:YAG Laser Troughing

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the current article is to analyze and compare post-retraction gingival height changes resulting from six different types of gingival-displacement methods, encompassing both conventional and surgical approaches. The study involved a comparative analysis of 263 teeth (consisting of 128 front teeth, 69 premolars, and 66 molars) from 23 patients. For the investigation, three classic retraction methods were utilized, namely the single-cord technique, retraction paste Expasyl, and retraction paste Astringent. Additionally, three surgical techniques were employed, which included ceramic bur rotary curettage, Er:YAG laser troughing, and diode laser troughing. A randomized split-mouth design was implemented, and a significance level of 0.05 was used for the study. The recovery of the free gingival margin height was assessed on gypsum models that were scanned using an intraoral scanner during the first and second week after the retraction procedure. The results revealed that all retraction methods, except for ceramic bur rotary curettage, led to clinically insignificant levels of gingival recession. The article provides insights into the effectiveness and safety of various gingival-displacement techniques, highlighting that most methods tested in the study resulted in minimal or negligible gingival recession post-retraction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Analysis of Post-Retraction Changes in Gingival Height after Conventional and Surgical Gingival Displacement: Rotary Curettage, Diode and Er:YAG Laser Troughing

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From another view since retraction paste systems depend on their expansion property upon contact with crevicular fluids, they might not provide enough displacement especially in cases of deep sulcus depth [ 4 , 12 , 19 ]. A randomized clinical trial investigated the GD using three different paste systems and reported a mean sulcular gingival width of (0.644 ± 0.22) in the Traxodent group, followed by the Expasyl group (0.590 ± 0.11), and the Magic Foam Cord group (0.528 ± 0.01) [ 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dentists’ knowledge and preference regarding gingival displacement methods

Alraheam,

Hattar,

Al-Asmar

et al. 2023

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction An accurate impression is an essential procedure for fabricating indirect fixed restorations. To achieve a precise final impression, the management of gingival tissue is without doubt a crucial. Aim To evaluate the use of different gingival displacement techniques among dental clinicians and to assess their associated knowledge and technique preferences. Methods A self-designed survey was created electronically and sent to a list of dentists. The survey was composed of multiple sections. Participants who stated that they do not use GD methods were asked to answer the survey questions based on their knowledge. Descriptive statistics were generated, andChi-square test was used to examine the association between the different variables. Results A total of 188 dentists participated in this study. The majority 144 (76.6%) use GD in their practice. When asked which technique yields a more accurate impression with lower incidence of repeating the impression, 93 (64.6%) reported retraction cord technique with a hemostatic agent results in a higher impression accuracy, while only 14 (9.7%) declared the retraction paste technique as being more accurate. Conclusion The cordless GD technique is believed to be easier, faster, and less traumatic to the gingival tissues, nevertheless, the outcome of dental impressions is believed to be more predictable with the use of conventional retraction cords and hemostatic medicaments.

show abstract

“…Однак використання зазначеного методу обмежено надгінгівальними краями препарування [4]. Непередбачувана резорбція тканин і дискомфорт пацієнта є проблемними питаннями, пов'язаними з технікою Dual Cord [5]. У методі Single Cord використовується один шнур, який видаляється перед виготовленням відбитка [5].…”

unclassified

“…Непередбачувана резорбція тканин і дискомфорт пацієнта є проблемними питаннями, пов'язаними з технікою Dual Cord [5]. У методі Single Cord використовується один шнур, який видаляється перед виготовленням відбитка [5]. Залишки ниток та неправильне ущільнення шнура можуть бути пов'язані із запаленням канатика та крайовим скороченням ясен.…”

unclassified

Gum Retraction Methods in Orthopedic Dentistry: Current State of the Problem

Nespriadko

Terekhov

2023

Scientific and practical journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gingival retraction is the procedure of bending the gingival margin away from the tooth surface, which provides sufficient horizontal and vertical space between the prepared finish line and the gingiva for the introduction of a sufficient amount of impression material. Several factors influence the success and durability of orthopedic restorations in dentistry. In particular, supragingival margins are necessary to maintain periodontal health, but do not provide optimal aesthetics. The gingival margin should be clean and accessible during impression making, and the gingival groove should be wide enough (from 0.15 to 0.20 mm). Therefore, in orthopedic dentistry, the problem of the optimal gum retraction technique, the influence of the chosen technique on the impression procedure is relevant. Ideally, the gum retraction technique should be simple, fast and inexpensive, should not cause damage to the periodontal tissues. Today, there are various methods of retraction, including retraction cords, rotary curettage, copper tapes, electrosurgical techniques, laser retraction, and the use of some types of polymer and plastic materials. The article provides an overview of the main commonly accepted methods of gum retraction, which can be classified into mechanical, chemical and surgical. Particular attention is paid to such retraction methods as non-medicated cords, medicated cords, wireless methods, astringent hemostatic agents, retraction paste for gums, vasoconstrictors, lasers, rotary curettage, electrosurgery. Study substantiation: Despite significant progress of orthopedic dentistry in the last decades, clear criteria for selection of method of retraction are not currently allocated. The purpose of the study: to conduct an analysis of modern and available methods of gum retraction in orthopedic dentistry, to highlight the safety and effectiveness criteria of each of the methods, depending on the clinical situation. The materials and methods: the available scientific sources of recent years, devoted to the technique of gum retraction in orthopedic dentistry, analyzed by the methods of review, system and content analysis. The search strategy was to manually search the Pub-Med and Google Scholar databases from 1985 to 2022 for articles related to retraction prior to making an impression of a fixed prosthesis. Key words included "impression making" and "gingival retraction". The clinical effectiveness of retraction methods is assessed according to the following criteria: A – effectiveness (degree of horizontal and vertical gum recession, possibility of controlling bleeding and outflow of gum fluid). B – degree of retraction (ideally, the agents used should not lead to damage to the epithelial tissue). Otherwise, this damage should be reversible. The maximum apical recession after gingival retraction should not exceed 0.10 mm. C-absorption of retraction agents in tissue should not cause systemic effects. The conclusion of the review is a general assessment of the effectiveness of retraction methods according to the following criteria: effectiveness, degree of retraction, absorption of retraction agents. Emphasis is placed on the greatest efficiency of the laser retraction method. The author suggests further research in this direction. Despite the significant progress of orthopedic dentistry in recent decades, additional research should be conducted to develop clear criteria for the effectiveness of gum retraction methods.

show abstract

Efficacy of Different Gingival Displacement Materials in the Management of Gingival Sulcus Width: A Comparative Study

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

A Comparative Analysis of Post-Retraction Changes in Gingival Height after Conventional and Surgical Gingival Displacement: Rotary Curettage, Diode and Er:YAG Laser Troughing

A Comparative Analysis of Post-Retraction Changes in Gingival Height after Conventional and Surgical Gingival Displacement: Rotary Curettage, Diode and Er:YAG Laser Troughing

Dentists’ knowledge and preference regarding gingival displacement methods

Gum Retraction Methods in Orthopedic Dentistry: Current State of the Problem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About