Methods: In a polystyrene mold (30mmX30mmX12mm), Post-ItÒ Index Notes (3M™) were used as placeholders to create a simulated gingival sulcus 8mm-deep with widths of 0.06mm, 0.13mm, and 0.19mm. The mold was filled with Permadyne™(3M ESPE™) automixed polyether impression material (Pentamix™ 3M) to simulate the gingiva. After setting, the elastomeric block was removed from the mold, the upper-edge cut at 45°, replaced in the mold and mass measured.
Three retraction pastes were added to the sulci according to manufacturer’s instructions. Depth measurements were taken. Each material was measured 8-times at each sulcus-width. Statistical analysis was done by one-way-ANOVA with post-hoc analysis conducted vis Tukey’s-HSD. Significance differences were predetermined at p<.05
Results: The average and standard deviation of three retraction pastes with three different sulcus widths were calculated.
Sulcus Width |
Experimental Product 1 |
Experimental Product 2 |
Experimental Product 3 |
|
Depth |
0.06 |
2.291+ 0.825 |
3.553 + 0.853 |
3.493 + 0.584 |
(mm) |
0.13 |
6.657 + 1.248 |
6.055 + 0.799 |
6.931 + 1.162 |
|
0.19 |
7.350 + 1.017 |
6.702 + 0.789 |
7.685 + 1.096 |
Conclusion: At all sulcus width (0.06mm, 0.13mm), Experimental Product 1 paste was inserted to deeper depths than Experimental Product 2 paste. At two narrower sulcus widths (0.06mm and 0.13mm), Experimental Product 1 paste was able to penetrate deeper than Experimental Product 3 paste. Yet at those sulcus widths, Experimental Product 2 paste did not penetrate significantly deeper than Experimental Product 3 paste. However, at the widest sulcus width (0.19mm), Experimental Product 2 paste demonstrated better penetration comparing to Experimental Product 3 paste. In addition, Experimental Product 1 paste is not significantly better in 0.19 mm sulcus width than Experimental Product 3 paste.