Clinical evaluation of the effect of two gingival retraction systems, gingival cuff and gingival retraction paste, on peri-implant soft tissue

Aims: The aim of this study was to clinically evaluate the host tissue response around oral implants using two gingival retraction systems, namely, G-Cuff(TM) and Traxodent® . Materials and Methods: Twenty cases were selected and divided into two groups: Group A - ten patients in whom gingival retra...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of interdisciplinary dentistry 2017-05, Vol.7 (2)
Main Authors: Gupta, Sugandha, Dhawan, Pankaj, Madhukar, Pankaj, Tandan, Piyush, Sachdeva, Aman
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aluminum
Data processing
Dental cement
Dental implants
Dental prosthetics
Dental restorative materials
Dentistry
Dentists
Edema
Gingiva
Hemostasis
Inflammation
Mucosa
Pain
Patients
Prostheses
Soft tissues
Statistical analysis
Transplants & implants
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aims: The aim of this study was to clinically evaluate the host tissue response around oral implants using two gingival retraction systems, namely, G-Cuff(TM) and Traxodent® . Materials and Methods: Twenty cases were selected and divided into two groups: Group A - ten patients in whom gingival retraction was done using G-Cuff(TM) and Group B - ten patients in whom gingival retraction was done using Traxodent® . Patients with immobile, stable, and planned cement-retained implant prosthesis were enrolled in the study. Both Group A and B patients, peri-implant soft tissues were analyzed three times: preretraction, postretraction, and after 7 days for the various parameters. Statistical Analysis Used: The data obtained were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test, Pearson's Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney test. Results: The use of G-Cuff(TM) resulted in decrease in the mean of the probing depth values after 7 days from 1.30 to 1.13 mm. The values of the probing depth for the Traxodent® group showed a slight increase from 1.30 mm to 1.60 and 1.57 mm at immediately and 7 days after retraction. The mucosal index increased for G-Cuff(TM) and Traxodent® group. Bleeding on probing significantly decreased in Traxodent® group. Conclusion: There was difference in the host tissue response by the two types of retraction agents in relation to some parameters, and also, the level of pain and discomfort by the use of G-Cuff(TM) was found in few cases. Based on the results of short-term evaluations, chemical cordless retraction system functioned statistically well in terms of hemostasis.
ISSN:2229-5194
2231-2706
DOI:10.4103/jid.jid_3_17