ABSTRACT
Este trabalho teve como objetivo levar o leitor a uma revisão da literatura sobre os diferentes métodos de afastamento gengival, suas técnicas, indicações e contraindicações. Foram abordadas as variações dos métodos e técnicas, a fim de facilitar a escolha mais adequada às diferentes situações clínicas. São feitas considerações sobre as soluções químicas, os fios utilizados para o afastamento gengival, as pastas adstringentes, bem como a combinação entre eles. Foram elaborados quadros comparativos entre os diferentes métodos de afastamento gengival, entre as soluções químicas mais utilizadas e entre as diferentes marcas comerciais existentes.
This paper aims to take the reader on a review of literature about the diff erent methods of gingival retraction, their techniques, indications and contraindications. Variations of the methods and techniques were discussed in order to facilitate the most appropriate choice for diff erent clinical situations. Some considerations were made about the chemical solutions, the gingival retraction cords, as well as their combination. Comparative tables among the diff erent gingival retraction methods, the most used chemical solutions, and the diff erent trademarks were prepared.
Subject(s)
Humans , Dental Impression Technique , Dental Prosthesis , Gingiva/surgery , PeriodonticsABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate the toxic effect of 3 different gingival retraction cords.Methods:DMEMextraction of DL-adren-aline HCl,aluminium sulphate and non-drug retraction cords with the extraction time of 5,10,15 and 30 min were respectively pre-pared and were used to culture human gingival fibroblasts(HGFs)in vitro respectively.Cell proliferation was tested by MTT assay. Cell apoptosis was examined by Annexin/PI method.Results:The 3 gingival retraction cord extractions inhibited the roliferation,pro-moted the apoptosis of HGFs(P <0.05),the effects were related to the extraction time.Conclusion:The 3 retraction cords have time-dependant cytotoxity.