Statement of Problem:Tetrahydrozoline has been introduced as new gingival retraction agent but its clinical efficacy with widely used conventional retraction agents has not been tested.Purpose:The study was designed to clinically evaluate efficacy of newer retraction agent tetrahydrozoline with two widely used retraction systems i.e., Expasyl retraction system and medicated retraction cords on basis of amount of gingival retraction.Materials and Methods:30 subjects were selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Maxillary Impressions were made with irreversible hydrocolloid for all subjects. Tray material was used for making the special tray. Latin Block Design was Used in the Study to avoid tissue fatigue. Retraction was done with aluminium chloride; Tetrahydrozoline and Expasyl according to Latin block design. Impressions were poured with die stone. Casts were retrieved and sections were made with die cutter. 3 mm thin slices were obtained. Each slice was used to measure the amount of retraction under stereomicroscope under 20x and images were transferred to image analyser.Results:The amount of gingival retraction obtained by using aluminium chloride as gingival retraction agent was maximum (148238.33 μm2) compared to tetrahydrozoline (140737.87 μm2) and Expasyl (67784.90 μm2).

Background and Objectives:For mounting the maxillary cast to articulator, minimum three reference points not on single line, decide the plane to which maxillary cast is mounted. Variations exist in condylar guidance when different anterior reference points are used to mount the cast. Type of articulator may have influence on condylar guidance. A clinical study was planned to evaluate the effects of different anterior points of reference and two different articulator systems on condylar guidance.Materials and Methods:Total 15 subjects were selected. Six sets of maxillary casts were obtained. Face bow record was made using orbitale as anterior point of reference and the record was transferred to the Arcon and Non-Arcon articulator. The second and third mounting on Arcon and Non-Arcon articulator were done using Superior and inferior annular groove on incisal pin of articulator. Protrusive interocclusal records were made for all the subjects. Two lateral cephalograms one in maximum intercuspation and the other in protrusion for left and right side were taken. Anatomic condylar guidance of the subject were obtained from radiograph tracing. Arcon and Non-arcon articulator were programmed with Protrusive interocclusal record of the subjects and the condylar guidance was tabulated for right and left side. The procedure was repeated for all three mountings for both the articulators.Results:The orbitale is the best reference point which mounts maxillary cast closer to anatomic position. Inferior annular groove can also be used as anterior point of the reference. The superior annular groove is not recommended anterior point of reference.

There are many factors involved in the success of a good quality complete dentures, one of them is retention. There are some forcing situations where providing optimal retention may be a problem, in which use of denture adhesives is recommended. In the present study, primary and secondary impressions were made on 20 completely edentulous patients, master cast was fabricated. Master cast was duplicated; heat-cured denture base was fabricated. The retention test for control group, powder group, wafer group, paste group was done using a customized force sensor device. Readings was subjected to ANOVA followed by post hoc test. Results show that the retention force value of the paste group was the maximum, followed by powder group, wafer group and the least retention force value was observed with control group. Within the limitations of the study it can be concluded that the paste form of denture adhesive has the best retentive property compared to the powder and wafer.