Authors : Dimple Bhawnani; Abhilasha Bhasin; Sneha S Mantri

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/5n76tpr2

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/5dx6thcy

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUN1512

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Isolation of the prepared margin along with control of gingival fluid and haemorrhage is an important factor to register finish lines, which can be achieved by displacing the gingiva away from the abutment which helps in better visualization of the prepared tooth surface. This study utilized digital scanning of rubber based impression material to compare the amount of gingival displacement produced by 3M ESPE capsule, plain retraction cord and impregnated retraction cord.  Aims: The aim of the study was to compare lateral and vertical gingival displacement produced by the three materials  Settings and Design: Case-Control  Methods and Material: Twenty participants requiring a full coverage restoration were selected. Gingiva around each tooth requiring a crown was retracted using the three materials and a rubber based impression was made. The impression was scanned using EXOCAD software to obtain readings for gingival displacement for control group, non- impregnated cord, impregnated cord and retraction paste.  Statistical analysis used: The scores were analysed in SPSS software using one way ANNOVA and post hoc analysis  Results: Significant difference was seen among all trial groups when compared to control. Highest mean vertical displacement was seen in clinical trial II (non- impregnated cord) followed by trial III ( retraction paste).  Conclusions: Impregnated cord and retraction paste both produced adequate retraction for the margings to be registered. Use of paste was less time consuming and less traumatic for the patient and therefore can be substituted for retraction cords.

Keywords : Gingival Retraction, Displacement, Fixed Partial Denture, Retraction Paste, Finish Line.

References :

1. Thimmappa M, Bhatia M, Somani P, Kumar DR. Comparative evaluation of three non invasive gingival displacement systems: An in vivo study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc.2018;(18):122-30.
2. Chaudhari J, Prajapati P, Patel J, Sethuraman R, Naveen YG. Comparative evaluation of the amount of gingival displacement produced by three different gingival retraction systems: An in vivo study. Contemp Clin Dent.2015;(6):189-95.
3. The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms: Ninth Edition. J Prosthet Dent.2017;117(5S):e1-e105
4. Shrivastava KJ, Bhoyar A, Agarwal S, Shrivastava S, Parlani S, Murthy V. Comparative clinical efficacy evaluation of three gingival displacement systems. J Nat Sci Biol Med.2015;(6): S53-7.
5. Bensen BW, Bomberg TJ, Hatch RA, Hoffman W Jr. Tissue displacement methods in fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent .1986;(55):175-181.
6. Ahmed SN, Doovan TE. Gingival displacement: survey results of dentists practice procedures. J Prosthet Dent.2015;1-5e2.
7. Acar O, Erkut S, Ozcelik TB, Ozdemir E, Akcil M. A clinical comparison of cordless and conventional displacement systems regarding clinical performance and impression quality. J Prosthet Dent .2014;(111):388-94.
8. Gajbhiye V, Banerjee R, Jaiswal P, Chandak A, Radke U. Comparative evaluation of three gingival displacement materials for efficacy in tissue management and dimensional accuracy. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2019;19(2):173-179.
9. Qureshi SM, Anasane NS, Kakade. Comparative evaluation of the amount of gingival displacement using three recent gingival retraction systems- in vivo study. Contemp Clin Dent.2020;11:28-33.
10. Raja Z, Nair C. A clinical study on gingival retraction. J Ind prosthodont Soc 2003;3(3):21-27.
11. Agrawal A, Lahori M, Arora S. A comparative evaluation of two contemporary cordless methods of gingival retraction: An in vivo study.J Interdiscip Dentistry.2019;9:51-8.
12. Kohli P.K., Hegde V. Comparative evaluation of efficacy of gingival retraction using chemical and mechanical methods: an in-vivo study. Asian J Pharm Clin Res.2018; 11(2):128-131.
13. Chandra S, Singh A, Gupta KK, et al. Effect of gingival displacement cord and cordless systems on the closure, displacement, and  inflammation of the gingival crevice. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(2):177-82.