Scientific Online Resource System

Scripta Scientifica Medicinae Dentalis

Application of α-adrenomimetic decongestants as chemical agents for gingival retraction

Iveta Katreva, Metodi Abadjiev, Simeon Simeonov, Ognjan Tivchev, Maya Doychinova, Tsvetan Tonchev

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to observe, compare and evaluate the effect of two α-adrenomimetic decongestants which are clinically approved nasal and eye drops - 0,05% xylometazoline hydrochloride and 0,05% tetrahydrozoline hydrochloride, when applied as chemical agents for chemo-mechanical retraction of free gingiva prior to impression making in fixed prosthodontics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study includes 90 prepared abutment teeth indicated for fixed prosthodontic treatment. α-adrenomimetic decongestants in the composition of 2 approved for clinical usage nasal and eye drops commercial products were applied as chemical agents for gingival retraction - Xylometazoline ( 0,05% xylometazoline hydrochloride) and Visine ( 0,05% tetrahydrozoline hydrochloride). Ultrapak retraction cord of four different sizes impregnated with the investigated chemical agents was used. Two steps two-layered impressions with polyvinyl and polydimethylsiloxane were taken from the prosthetic fields. Impression sections were fabricated and studied under microscope.

RESULTS: The low viscosity polyvinyl and polydimethyl siloxane layers tend to penetrate deeper in the gingival groove after chemo-mechanical retraction with Xylometazoline compared to the second group impressions fabricated after Visine retraction.

CONCLUSION: The conducted testing demonstrated that effective retraction of the free marginal gingiva is possible to obtain with α-adernomimetic decongestants. 0,05% xylometazoline hydrochloride (Xylometazoline) provides better results in comparison to the eye decongestant drops 0,05% tеtrahydrozoline hydrochloride (Visine).


Keywords

gingival retraction; retraction agents; chemo-mechanical retraction

Full Text


References

Kisov HK. Otpechatachni materiali i otpechatachni metodi v nepodvizhnoto zaboprotezirane. Sofia: Index; 1998. Bulgarian.

Abadzhiev M. Comparative research of the subgingival impression quality by fixed prosthesis using one and double cord retraction technique. Journal of IMAB - Annual Proceeding (Scientific Papers). 2009;2:52-54.

A Malbaker. Gingival Retraction - Techinques and Materials: A Review. Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal. 2010;30(2).

Aimjirakul P, Masuda T, Takahashi H, Miura H. Gingival sulcus simulation model for evaluating the penetration characteristics of elastomeric impression materials. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16:385-389.

Al-Ani A, Bennani V, Chandler NP, Lyons KM, Tomson WM. New Zealand dentists` use of gingival retraction techniques for fixed prosthodontics and implants. New Zeal Dent J. 2010;106:92-96.

Bowles WH, Tardy SJ, Vahadi A. Evaluation of the new gingival retraction agents. J Dent Res. 1991;70(11):1447-49.

Csillag M, Nyiri G, Vag J, Fazekas A. Dose-related effects of epinephrine on human gingival blood flow and crevicular fluid production used as a soaking solution for chemoch-mechanical tissue retraction. J Prosthed Dent. 2007;97(1):6-11.

Donovan TE, Chee WW. Current concepts in gingival displacement. Dent Clin North Am. 2004;48(2):433-44.

Felpel LP. A review of pharmacotherapeutics for prosthetic dentistry: Part I. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1997;3:285-292.

Hansen PA, Tira DE, Barlow J. Current methods of finish-line exposure by practicing prosthodontists. J. Prosthodont. 1999;8(3):163-70.

HE Strassler, L Boksman. Tissue Management, Gingival Retraction and Hemostasis. Available from: http://www.oralhealthgroup.com/news/tissue-management-gingival-retraction-and-hemostasis/1000519731/?&er=NA

Kopač I, Batista U, Cvetko E, Marion L. Viability of fibroblasts in cell culture after treatment with different chemical retraction agents. J. Oral Rehab. 2002:29:98-104.

Liu C, Huang F, Yang L, Chou L, Chou M, Chanh Y. Cytotoxic effects of gingival retraction cords on human gingival fibroblasts in vitro. J. Oral Rehab. 2004;31:368-372.

Nowakowska D. The impact of retraction astringents on gingival margin tissues from literature review of in vivo studies. Protet. Stomatol. 2009;59:119-124.

Nowakowska D, Saczko J, Kulbacka J, Choromanska A. Dynamic oxidoreductive potential of astringent retraction agents. Folia Biol. (Praha). 2010;56:263-268.

Nowakowska D, Saczko J, Kulbacka J, Choromanska A, Raszewski Z. Cytotoxic potential of Vasoconstrictor Experimental Gingival Retraction Agents - in Vitro Study on Primary Human Gingival Fibroblasts. Folia Biologica (Praha). 2012;58:37-43.

Pelzner RB, Kempler D, Stark MM, Lum LB, Nicholson RJ, Soelberg KB. Human blood pressure and pulse rate response to racemic epinephrine retraction cord. J Prosthed Dent 1978;39(3):287-92.

Strassler HE, Tissue Management, Gingival Retraction and Hemostasis. Benco Dental, Education Department, Available from: http://d3e9u3gw8odyw8.cloudfront.net/ie2_ce_tissue_management.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14748/ssmd.v1i2.1276

Refbacks

About The Authors

Iveta Katreva
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine

Metodi Abadjiev
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine

Simeon Simeonov
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine

Ognjan Tivchev
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine

Maya Doychinova
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of dental medicine

Tsvetan Tonchev
Medical University of Varna
Bulgaria

Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of dental medicine

Font Size


|