Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study

AIM: An attempt is made to investigate clinical efficacy of cord, paste system, and a strip gingival retractile materials. This study aims to evaluate and compare the gingival retraction efficacy of retraction strip along with conventional retraction cord and paste system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thimmappa, Meenakshi, Bhatia, Mehak, Somani, Prakash, Kumar, D. R. V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5903175/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692565
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_225_17
_version_ 1783314902785458176
author Thimmappa, Meenakshi
Bhatia, Mehak
Somani, Prakash
Kumar, D. R. V.
author_facet Thimmappa, Meenakshi
Bhatia, Mehak
Somani, Prakash
Kumar, D. R. V.
author_sort Thimmappa, Meenakshi
collection PubMed
description AIM: An attempt is made to investigate clinical efficacy of cord, paste system, and a strip gingival retractile materials. This study aims to evaluate and compare the gingival retraction efficacy of retraction strip along with conventional retraction cord and paste system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This in vivo experimental study was carried out on 30 patients. Three different gingival retraction systems were used to evaluate the amount of vertical and lateral displacement. Based on selection criteria, 30 individuals requiring fixed dental prosthesis with respect to mandibular first molar were selected. Tooth preparation for metal ceramic restoration with subgingival finish line was performed. Gingival displacement was accomplished with ultrapak cord, merocel strip, and magic foam cord immediately, 7 and 14 days after the tooth preparation, respectively. The amount of gingival displacement in vertical and lateral directions was measured at mesiobuccal, midbuccal, and distobuccal regions of the prepared tooth. The vertical retraction was measured intraorally by using digital vernier caliper, and postgingival displacement impression was used to measure lateral gingival retraction. Stereomicroscopic images of impression under ×10 resolution were transferred to image analyzer to measure the lateral displacement. The obtained data analyzed in one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni test were used to determine the significant difference at P < 0.05 level. RESULTS: ANOVA test showed the significant difference between the materials tested with respect to the mean vertical and lateral gingival retraction (P = 0.001). Multiple comparisons by Bonferroni test revealed a significant difference in vertical and lateral displacement among the materials tested. CONCLUSIONS: Merocel strip provided the maximum amount of vertical and lateral tissue displacement, followed by ultrapak cord and least with magic foam cord which was statistically significant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5903175
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59031752019-04-01 Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study Thimmappa, Meenakshi Bhatia, Mehak Somani, Prakash Kumar, D. R. V. J Indian Prosthodont Soc Original Article AIM: An attempt is made to investigate clinical efficacy of cord, paste system, and a strip gingival retractile materials. This study aims to evaluate and compare the gingival retraction efficacy of retraction strip along with conventional retraction cord and paste system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This in vivo experimental study was carried out on 30 patients. Three different gingival retraction systems were used to evaluate the amount of vertical and lateral displacement. Based on selection criteria, 30 individuals requiring fixed dental prosthesis with respect to mandibular first molar were selected. Tooth preparation for metal ceramic restoration with subgingival finish line was performed. Gingival displacement was accomplished with ultrapak cord, merocel strip, and magic foam cord immediately, 7 and 14 days after the tooth preparation, respectively. The amount of gingival displacement in vertical and lateral directions was measured at mesiobuccal, midbuccal, and distobuccal regions of the prepared tooth. The vertical retraction was measured intraorally by using digital vernier caliper, and postgingival displacement impression was used to measure lateral gingival retraction. Stereomicroscopic images of impression under ×10 resolution were transferred to image analyzer to measure the lateral displacement. The obtained data analyzed in one-way ANOVA and Bonferroni test were used to determine the significant difference at P < 0.05 level. RESULTS: ANOVA test showed the significant difference between the materials tested with respect to the mean vertical and lateral gingival retraction (P = 0.001). Multiple comparisons by Bonferroni test revealed a significant difference in vertical and lateral displacement among the materials tested. CONCLUSIONS: Merocel strip provided the maximum amount of vertical and lateral tissue displacement, followed by ultrapak cord and least with magic foam cord which was statistically significant. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5903175/ /pubmed/29692565 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_225_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Thimmappa, Meenakshi
Bhatia, Mehak
Somani, Prakash
Kumar, D. R. V.
Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title_full Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title_short Comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study
title_sort comparative evaluation of three noninvasive gingival displacement systems: an in vivo study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5903175/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692565
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_225_17
work_keys_str_mv AT thimmappameenakshi comparativeevaluationofthreenoninvasivegingivaldisplacementsystemsaninvivostudy
AT bhatiamehak comparativeevaluationofthreenoninvasivegingivaldisplacementsystemsaninvivostudy
AT somaniprakash comparativeevaluationofthreenoninvasivegingivaldisplacementsystemsaninvivostudy
AT kumardrv comparativeevaluationofthreenoninvasivegingivaldisplacementsystemsaninvivostudy