EC Dental Science

Introduction: The aim of our study was to determine which gingival retraction techniques are frequently performed in daily practice by dentists from the private sector in the city of Casablanca, Morocco. The criteria for choosing these techniques, the knowledge of the different techniques as well as the desire for training on this subject were also investigated.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 273 dentists practicing in Casablanca by using an anonymous questionnaire.

Results: 80.2% of dentists used cervical margin access techniques in daily practice. For the 19.8% who avoid it, the main reasons were loss of time, high cost and non-benefit of these techniques. The most common method used was the retraction cords (75.8%), followed by the temporary crown technique (53.4%). Few practitioners used gingival retraction pastes and very few dentists used laser and electrosurgery. 85% of the dentists in our sample were satisfied with the cervical adaptation of their joint prostheses with gingival retraction techniques and 59.3% of the dentists wished to receive further training on this subject.

Conclusion: Similar to some studies conducted on gingival retraction techniques, our study showed that the use of these techniques is considered necessary by a large proportion of practitioners. Practitioners even stated the need for continuing education in order to stay current with new techniques in dentistry and improve the quality of prosthetic care provided to patients.

Keywords: Gingival Retraction; Private Practice; Casablanca

1. Stafin-zerbib A. “Incidence parodontale des accès aux limites en prothèse fixée: revue de la littérature”. Stratégie Prothétique Avril2 (2008).
2. Pesson DM., et al. “Réalisation des techniques d’ouverture sulculaire en pratique quotidienne. Enquête faite auprès des chirurgiens-dentistes d’Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire”. Odonto-Stomatologie Tropicale = Tropical Dental Journal152 (2015): 25-32.
3. Tosches NA and Salvi GE. “Gingival retraction methods. A literature review”. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed2 (2009): 121‑138.
4. Adnan S and Agwan MA. “Gingival Retraction Techniques: A Review”. Dent Update 45 (2018): 284-297.
5. Descamp F. Pratique de l’empreinte en prothèse fixée Paris, CdP (2012): 138.
6. Baillon J. Les techniques d'accès aux limites cervicales en prothèse fixée: habitudes des praticiens en midi-pyrenées Thèse Med Dent Toulouse (2014).
7. Ahmed SN and Donovan TE. “Gingival displacement: Survey results of dentists’ practice procedures”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry1 (2015): 81-5. e1-2.
8. Gadhavi MA., et al. “A survey on the use of various gingival displacement techniques in fixed partial denture by the prosthodontists in vadodara city”. Indian Journal of Dental Research2 (2018): 176‑180.
9. Haider Y., et al. “Survey of dental materials used by dentists for indirect restorations in Saudi Arabia”. The International Journal of Prosthodontics1 (2017): 83‑85.
10. Donovan TE., et al. “Review and survey of medicaments used with gingival retraction cords”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry4 (1985): 525‑531.
11. McCracken MS., et al. “Impression Techniques Used for Single-Unit Crowns: Findings from the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network”. Journal of Prosthodontics8 (2018): 722‑732.
12. Hansen PA., et al. “Current Methods of Finish-Line Exposure by Practicing Prosthodontists”. Journal of Prosthodontics3 (1999): 163‑170.
13. Al-Ani A., et al. “New Zealand dentists' use of gingival retraction techniques for fixed prosthodontics and implants”. NZ Dental Journal Articles3 (2010): 92-96.
14. Azzi R., et al. “Comparative study of gingival retraction methods”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry4 (1983): 561‑565.
15. Ingraham R., et al. “Rotary gingival curettage-a technique for tooth preparation and management of the gingival sulcus for impression taking”. International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry4 (1981): 8-33.
16. Gherlone E., et al. “The use of 980-nm diode and 1064-nm Nd: YAG laser for gingival retraction in fixed prostheses”. The Journal of Oral Laser Applications (2004): 183-190.
17. Bartala M., et al. “Prothèse fixée: empreintes en prothèse fixée”. In: Guide clinique d’odontologie (chapitre 10). Paris, Elsevier (2011): 221-226.
18. Armand S. “L’accès aux limites cervicales en prothèse fixée”. In: Cahiers de l’Association Dentaire Française 7.1 (2000): 18-23.
19. Harrison JD. “Effect of retraction materials on the gingival sulcus epithelium”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 11 (1961): 514.
20. Kumbuloglu O., et al. “Clinical evaluation of different gingival retraction cords”. Quintessence International2 (2007): e92-98.
21. Ramadan FA., et al. “Histopathologic response of gingival tissues to hemodent and aluminum chloride solutions as tissue displacement materials”. Egyptian Dental Journal 18 (1972): 337-352.
22. Benson B., et al. “Tissue displacement methods in fixed prosthodontics”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 55 (1986): 175-181.
23. Albaker AM. “Gingival retraction - techniques and materials: a review”. Pakistan Oral and Dental Journal2 (2010): 545-551.
24. Petrie CS., et al. “A survey of U.S. prosthodontists and dental schools on the current materials and methods for final impressions for complete denture prosthodontics”. Journal of Prosthodontics4 (2005): 253‑262.