TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative evaluation of efficacy of gingival retraction using chemical and mechanical methods
T2 - An in vivo study
AU - Kohli, Parampreet Kaur
AU - Hegde, Veena
PY - 2018/2/1
Y1 - 2018/2/1
N2 - 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).
AB - 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).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041662840&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041662840&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i2.22674
DO - 10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i2.22674
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85041662840
SN - 0974-2441
VL - 11
SP - 128
EP - 131
JO - Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research
JF - Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research
IS - 2
ER -