none 10.31254/dentistry.2023.8206 BioMed Research Publishers BioMed Research Publishers 16195 155123112 314763 20231116192124950 10.31254 2023-11-16T19:37:08Z 2023-11-16T19:21:25Z 0 International Journal of Dentistry Research Int J Dentistry Res. 25813218 10.31254/dentistry https://www.dentistryscience.com/ 8 30 2023 8 2 Chitra Goyal Sunil Kumar Mv Alok Sharma Rahi Goyal Shirish Sharma Introduction: The precise reproduction of the abutment (implant) provides clinician with crucial clinical information of the relative position and orientation of the implant to other implants, teeth and soft tissue that allow them to fabricate exact- fitting, bio-integrated restoration. For that it is necessary to expose, access & isolate the implant region, especially when cement retained implant prosthesis are in consideration, where conventional crown and bridge impression and optical impression technique is used. Material and Method: Patient who accepted to participate were chosen for the study. Coincidentally all 15 patients were female. They were explained the purpose and methodology, agreed for periodic follow up at the interval of one month after placement of healing abutment and 7 days after using the retraction cord. Conclusion: The conclusions that were drawn from this study are: Both materials showed clinically and statistically significant amount of vertical soft tissue displacement. Among the both soft tissue displacement agents, non-impregnated retraction cord showed the more vertical soft tissue displacement than Expasyl Paste. But, the amount of retraction offered by this paste is limited with extremely subgingival margins. But the advantages with Expasyl paste over the retraction cord were its ease of application, painless, quick, and without agony to the patient. 8 30 2023 49 56 1 10.31254/biomed-crossmark-policy www.biomedresearch.org false 10.31254/dentistry.2023.8206 https://www.dentistryscience.com/IJDR_202382_06.pdf 1. Al-Ani A, Bennani V, Chandler NP, Lyons KM, Thomson WM. New Zealand dentists' use of gingival retraction techniques for fixed prosthodontics and implants. NZ Dent J. 2010 Sep 1;106(3):92-6. 10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0047 2. Bennani V, Schwass D, Chandler N. Gingival retraction techniques for implants versus teeth: current status. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2008 Oct 1;139(10):1354-63. Brazilian Oral Research Chang 25 492 2011 10.1590/S1806-83242011000600004 Effect of a cordless retraction paste material on implant surfaces: an in vitro study 3. Chang YS, Bennani V, Tawse-Smith A, Girvan L. Effect of a cordless retraction paste material on implant surfaces: an in vitro study. Brazilian Oral Research. 2011;25:492-9. 4. Kamath R, Sarandha DL, Baid GC. Advances in gingival retraction. International Journal of Clinical Dental Science. 2011;2(1). 10.1038/sj.bdj.4813947 5. Handelsman M. Surgical guidelines for dental implant placement. British Dental Journal. 2006 Aug;201(3):139-52. 10.4103/0972-124X.115666 6. Jyothi SG, Triveni MG, Mehta DS, Nandakumar K. Evaluation of single-tooth replacement by an immediate implant covered with connective tissue graft as a biologic barrier. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2013 May;17(3):354. 7. Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics, Quintessence Pub. 2011. 8. Expasyl Technique Tips & Troubleshooting.ftp.endoco.com/link/KerrExpasylTechnicalinfo. Pdf:1-9 Journal of Clinical Periodontology Al Hamad 35 1053 2008 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01335.x A clinical study on the effects of cordless and conventional retraction techniques on the gingival and periodontal health 9. Al Hamad KQ, Azar WZ, Alwaeli HA and Said KN. A clinical study on the effects of cordless and conventional retraction techniques on the gingival and periodontal health.Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2008;35:1053-58. 10.4103/0972-124X.65436 10. Phatale S, Marawar PP, Byakod G, Lagdive SB, Kalburge JV. Effect of retraction materials on gingival health: A histopathological study. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. 2010 Jan;14(1):35. 10.4103/2229-5194.85023 11. Prasad KD, Hegde C, Agrawal G, Shetty M. Gingival displacement in prosthodontics: A critical review of existing methods. Journal of interdisciplinary dentistry. 2011 Jul 1;1(2):80-6. 10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60097-3 12. Bennani V, Aarts JM, He LH. A comparison of pressure generated by cordless gingival displacement techniques. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2012 Jun 1;107(6):388-92. 10.1007/s13191-012-0140-y 13. Gupta A, Prithviraj DR, Gupta D, Shruti DP. Clinical evaluation of three new gingival retraction systems: A research report. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. 2013 Mar;13:36-42. 14. Gupta R, Aggarwal R, Siddiqui Z. Comparison of various methods of gingival retraction on gingival and Periodontal health and marginal fit. Int J Oral Health Dent (IJOHD). 2016;2:243-7. 15. Rao BD, Nayar S, Rajyalakshmi R, Rajmohan CS. Comparative evaluation of gingival displacement using Expasyl, Magic foam cord and Medicated retraction cord-An in-vivo study. Trends in Prosthodontics and Dental Implantology. 2012 Dec 15;3(1):8-11.