[Evaluation of gingival inflammation related to different retraction agents].
| Autor: | Sun XW; Dept. of Prosthodontics, Yantai Oral Hospital, Yantai 264000, China., Sun GL, Xiao LJ |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | čínština |
| Zdroj: | Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology [Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi] 2008 Feb; Vol. 26 (1), pp. 53-5. |
| Abstrakt: | Objective: To choose the best retraction agent for the clinic by evaluating the gingival inflammation related to three kinds of retraction agents. Methods: 40 maxillary premolars were divided into four groups according to the randomized block design: Ferric sulfate group, aluminum chloride group, epinephrine group, sodium chloride group(control group), each 10 teeth, respectively used 25% AlCl3, 15.5% Fe2(SO4)3, 0.1% HCl-epinephrine, sodium chloride as retraction agents. The quantity of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) and the active level of aspartate amino-transferase (AST) in gingival crevicular fluid were measured before and 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 days after retracting gingiva by four kinds retraction agents. The changes of GCF were calculated. Results: The change of the GCF from the smallest to the largest was sodium chloride, 0.1% HCl-epinephrine, 25% AlCl,, 15.5% Fe2 (SO)3. Compared with sodium chloride, only 15.5% Fe2 (SO)3 in AST was the significant difference in the first day and the third day (P < 0.05). AST of ferric sulfate group after 1, 3 days greater than 800 IU. Conclusion: 0.1% HCl-epinephrine is suggested in patient without cardiovascular disease. For patient with cardiovascular disease, the better substitute is 25% AlCl3. 15.5% Fe2 (SO4)3 will not be used until its concentration is fallen. |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|