A comparative evaluation of amount of gingival displacement produced by four different gingival displacement agents – Anin vivo study

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the efficacy of ViscoStat clear, Vasozine, and Racegel (with and without cord) with respect to the amount of lateral gingival displacement produced by them. Settings and Design: Comparative - In vivo study. Material and Methods: Thirty consented volunteers were selected in the age group of 18–22 years. Maxillary right first premolar and lateral incisor and maxillary left central incisor and canine were selected for each individual. A composite resin standard reference point was made two millimeters below the gingival margin on the midsection of the labial surface of each tooth. By simple random sampling, the agents (ViscoStat clear, Vasozine, and Racegel with cord and Racegel without cord) were used for gingival displacement on each of the selected teeth. Pre- and postgingival displacement impressions were made with medium-body polyvinyl siloxane impression material. Three-millimeter thick buccolingual slice sections were obtained of the models and measured under a stereo microscope (×20 magnification), and the amount of displacement was calculated. Statistical Analysis used: The Kruskal–Wallis test and the Mann–Whitney U-test were used for comparison between the amounts of gingival displacement produced by them. Results: Mean displacement produced (in mm 2 ) by Racegel with cord, tetrahydrozoline, ViscoStat clear, and Racegel is 0.2256, 0.2158, 0.2069, and 0.1414, respectively. Conclusions: The largest mean gingival displacement was produced by Racegel with cord (0.2256 mm 2 ) and lowest by Racegel without cord (0.1414 mm 2 ). There was no significant statistical difference in the amount of gingival displacement produced between the four agents.

A Comparative Analysis of Post-Retraction Changes in Gingival Height after Conventional and Surgical Gingival Displacement: Rotary Curettage, Diode and Er:YAG Laser Troughing

“…Similarly, Kesari ZI (2019) obtained comparable results, stating that the best outcomes were achieved using a retraction cord with Racegel containing 25% aluminum chloride. Nonetheless, there was no significant difference between the tested methods—retraction cord with Racegel, Viscostat Clear containing 25% aluminum chloride, Vasozine eyedrops containing 0.05% tetrahydrozoline, and Racegel without a cord [ 41 ]. Pressure also plays a role in the quality of impressions [ 42 , 43 ].…”

Gingival Displacement in the Vertical and Horizontal Dimension under the Condition of Mild Gingivitis—A Randomized Clinical Study

“…The displacement in horizontal direction is essential to achieve sufficient thickness of the impression material to avoid distortion or tearing off [1,30]. The measurement of the enhancement of the area [4,20] or the 3D volume does not give differentiated information about the displacement in those two crucial directions.…”

“…This area is identical for both prepared and unprepared teeth. Therefore, the conduct of clinical studies on gingival displacement performance has been established for many years on unprepared teeth [3,7,18,20] in addition to prepared teeth. Thus, the advantages of studies on unprepared teeth can be exploited, such as a more feasible recruitment, if specific teeth (e.g., upper premolars) shall be investigated.…”

“…The gingival conditions have to be considered when investigating gingival displacement techniques. In the clinical reality, the inclusion criteria of a healthy periodontal and/or gingival status as given in clinical studies [3][4][5]7,8,10,12,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] are often not fully met.…”

Effectiveness of cordless techniques in gingival displacement. A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The effectiveness of gel as a cordless technique on gingival displacement in terms of sulcular height was determined in two 14, 26 studies,…”