背景:市场上有许多牙龈回缩系统。本研究旨在评估四种牙龈回缩系统的临床疗效,即,浸渍收缩绳,牙龈收缩胶囊,回缩粘贴,和聚乙酸乙烯酯条。
方法:共选择20人进行研究,收集了100个标本。根据用于牙龈移位的材料将标本分为五组。第一天,没有牙龈移位的基线印象。之后,使用以下四种牙龈回缩系统中的任何一种进行印象:浸渍的回缩绳(SURE-Cord®Plus;SureDentCorporation,Junwon-gu,韩国),收缩胶囊(3MESPE收敛收缩膏胶囊;3M公司,圣保罗,MN),回缩膏(Traxodent®Hemodent®粘贴回缩系统;PremierDentalCo.,普利茅斯会议,PA)和聚乙酸乙烯酯条(Merocel;MerocelCo.,神秘主义者,CT),每个系统之间有14天的间隔。使用光学显微镜测量牙龈位移的量作为在水平面中从牙齿到牙龈c的距离。
结果:各实验组牙龈位移均高于对照组(P<0.01)。在实验组中,聚醋酸乙烯酯条具有最高的牙龈位移值(541.65μm),其次是浸渍收缩线(505.37μm),收缩胶囊(333.57μm),和收缩膏(230.63μm)。
结论:在本体内研究的范围内,在四个评估系统中发现了水平牙龈位移的显着差异。所有四个系统都超过了200μm的水平位移要求。在聚醋酸乙烯酯条(Merocel)中发现了牙龈位移的最大值,然后是浸渍收缩绳(SURE-Cord),和收缩胶囊(3MESPE),在回缩糊剂(Traxodent)中发现了最低值。
BACKGROUND: There are numerous gingival retraction systems available on the market. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of four gingival retraction systems, namely, impregnated retraction cord, gingival retraction capsule, retraction paste, and polyvinyl acetate strips.
METHODS: A total of 20 people were chosen for the study, and 100 specimens were collected. The specimens were classified into five groups based on the materials used for gingival displacement. On the first day, a baseline impression without gingival displacement was made. Afterward, impressions were made with any of the following four gingival retraction systems: impregnated retraction cord (SURE-Cord® Plus; Sure Dent Corporation, Jungwon-gu, South Korea), retraction capsule (3M ESPE astringent retraction paste capsule; 3M Corporation, St. Paul, MN), retraction paste (Traxodent® Hemodent® Paste Retraction System; Premier Dental Co., Plymouth Meeting, PA) and polyvinylacetate strips (Merocel; Merocel Co., Mystic, CT), with a 14-day interval between each system. The amount of gingival displacement was measured using an optical microscope as the distance from the tooth to the gingiva crest in a horizontal plane.
RESULTS: All experimental groups had higher gingival displacement than the control group (P < 0.01). Among the experimental groups, polyvinyl acetate strips had the highest gingival displacement value (541.65 μm), followed by impregnated retraction cord (505.37 μm), retraction capsule (333.57 μm), and retraction paste (230.63 μm).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this in vivo study, significant differences in horizontal gingival displacement were discovered among the four evaluated systems. The horizontal displacement requirements of 200 μm were exceeded by all four systems. The maximum value for gingival displacement was found in polyvinyl acetate strips (Merocel), followed by impregnated retraction cord (SURE-Cord), and retraction capsule (3M ESPE), and the lowest value was found in retraction paste (Traxodent).