Abstract
Marginal integrity is one of the main factors that contribute to the outcome of a restoration and longevity of the restoration and cast restorations. An increased significance on the perio–restorative interface in restorative dentistry is essential to enable the utilization of the concept of biologic width in a practical manner. The goal, regarding the management of gingival tissues, is to ensure that the peridontium is in a healthy state. The oral cavity is a difficult to treat because of lips, cheeks, and tongue that hinders and makes it difficult to visualize and manipulate instruments in the area to be treated related. Gingival retraction is essential to perform better when the finish lines of the restoration is below the gingival margin. There are various gingival retractions that have been employed previously like mechanical, chemical, surgical and chemomechanical procedures. These methods not only provide an ideal working environment and ample vision, but also maintain hemostasis to certain extent. The choice of a retraction method depends on clinical situation and accessibility. The purpose of this review is to demonstrate the recent retraction materials and techniques.
Highlights
Marginal integrity is one of the main factors that contribute to the outcome of a restoration and longevity of the restoration and cast restorations
Gingival retraction is essential to perform better when the finish lines of the restoration is below the gingival margin
In order to aid in proper cavity preparation, subsequent impression procedures and restoration, soft tissues should be excluded from the operating site [1]
Summary
If the crown is smaller, restoration is to be placed after increasing crown length after gingival surgery. Soft tissue retraction can be classified based on three principle methods that are available for use today: 1) Mechanical; 2) Chemomechanical; and 3) Electrosurgical. Various gingival retractions methods have been employed previously like mechanical, chemical, surgical and chemomechanical procedures and each type is loaded with its own pros and cons [2]. To overcome these limitations, various newer retraction systems are introduced which are given as follows: Recent advances: 1. 3. Is a viscous paste used for all procedures requiring gingival retraction including: impressions, seating of restorations, fitting rubber dams, and restoring class II, III, and V cavities. 3. Disposable metal dispenser tips are too large, causes difficulty to express.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call