Comparative evaluation of the effect of impregnated retraction cord versus laser on gingival attachment level and pain perception following retraction for subgingival margins - A prospective, split-mouth, controlled, clinical study

Author:

Diwan Vipul1,Chauhan Manish R.2,Tembhurne Jyoti2,Gangurde Arti2,Wani Hemraj2,Danane Saurabh2

Affiliation:

1. Rural Health and Training Centre, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India

2. Department of Prosthodontics, Government Dental College and Hospital, CSMT, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate and compare the effect of impregnated retraction cord vs Laser on gingival attachment level and pain perception following retraction for subgingival margins. Settings and Design: Many methods for achieving and measuring the amount of gingival retraction in fixed prosthodontic work have been advocated. Though the gingival attachment level is crucial in Periodontology, the literature available regarding the effect of these retraction methods on the same is scarce. Hence, this clinical study was designed to compare the pain perception and amount of gingival recession when impregnated cord and laser were used for retraction. Materials and Methods: In 40 subjects (age range of 20 to 40 years) with single missing maxillary incisor, the abutments were prepared with subgingival margins, to receive a full coverage metal-ceramic fixed dental prosthesis. The gingiva was retracted on one of the abutments with impregnated retraction cord and on the other with diode laser. Gingival attachment levels were compared at six sites per abutment using superimposition of digital scans, preoperative and four weeks after cementation of final prosthesis. Statistical Analysis Used: Statistical analysis of the data for gingival recession was done using t-test. Pain perception was analysed with Chi-square test. Pain perception by patients following retraction was compared with VAS scale. Results: The average values of gingival recession on buccal side were 0.61 mm and 0.38 mm and on the palatal side were 0.58 mm and 0.35 mm for impregnated retraction cord and laser respectively. The P values of <0.01 indicated a highly significant difference between the two groups. Intragroup comparison did not show significant differences between various sites. Pain and discomfort produced by cord method was moderate in comparison with mild/no pain with diode laser and the difference was highly significant. Conclusion: Retraction cord produced more gingival recession than the diode laser, which was statistically highly significant on both buccal and palatal aspects of the teeth. Patients experience with diode laser technique was less painful in comparison with retraction cord method.

Publisher

Medknow

Reference46 articles.

1. Clinical effectiveness of mechanical-chemical tissue displacement methods;Weir;J Prosthet Dent,1984

2. The linear accuracy of impressions and stone dies as affected by the thickness of the impression margin;Laufer;Int J Prosthodont,1994

3. Tissue displacement methods in fixed prosthodontics;Benson;J Prosthet Dent,1986

4. Gingival retraction methods: A systematic review;Tabassum;J Prosthodont,2017

5. A comparison of gingival inflammation related to retraction cords;de Gennaro;J Prosthet Dent,1982

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3