Efficacy of conventional cord vs cordless techniques for gingival displacement

Summaries 4 min 254

Font Size

Created On: 27/04/2021

Efficacy of conventional cord vs cordless techniques for gingival displacement

This meta-analysis and systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy of gingival displacement with the aid of conventional cordless and cords techniques and evaluate the reliability of the estimation methods.

See All

Key take away

In gingival displacement, the cord approach led to greater displacement in comparison with the cordless approach. Assessing sulcular width with the aid of digital microscope images procured from sectioned gypsum casts appears to be an adequate and versatile experimental approach for estimating displacement.

Background

Method

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and detected studies that were then submitted to the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment. Utilizing the Review Manager Software, an evaluation of the gingival displacement was done.

Result

Overall, 9 studies were chosen. The commonly noted risks of bias were: (i) blinding of outcome evaluation, (ii) absence of sample size calculation, and (iii) random sequence generation, and. Most studies demonstrated procuring a width of more than 0.2 mm. Expasyl paste was reported to be the most effective cordless material.

For measuring displacement, assessing the sulcular width using a digital microscope image procured from a sectioned gypsum cast is an adequate and versatile experimental approach while evaluating sulcular width directly on the impression material is a limited methodology.