ArticleCureus2025
The Impact of Two Cordless Retraction Materials on Inflammatory Biomarkers Interleukin-1 Beta and Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha in Gingival Crevicular Fluid: An In-Vivo Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Quorum sensing geneFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the inflammatory responses of two cordless gingival retraction systems by assessing the levels of interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). The objectives were to measure IL-1β and TNF-α levels before and after retraction using kaolin-based and polyvinyl acetate-based cordless gingival retraction materials at baseline, 1 h, and 24 h, and to compare the inflammatory profiles of these materials. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis in-vivo comparative study used a split-mouth design, with each of the 10 enrolled patients serving as their own control by receiving both kaolin-based paste (Traxodent®, Premier Dental Products, Plymouth Meeting, PA, USA) and polyvinyl acetate-based strip (Merocel®, Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) on different endodontically treated teeth requiring full-coverage crowns, thereby minimizing interindividual variability. The allocation of both agents to specific teeth was systematically determined based on clinical suitability and tooth position, alternating between the contralateral teeth to ensure consistent intraoral conditions. After oral prophylaxis and a 7-day washout period, baseline GCF samples were collected using sterile absorbent paper point (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA). Traxodent®, a kaolin-based material, was applied to one tooth, and Merocel®, a polyvinyl acetate-based material, was applied to another tooth in each patient. GCF samples were collected at baseline, 1 and 24 h post-retraction, stored at -70
resultsBoth materials significantly increased IL-1β and TNF-α levels after 1 h. The polyvinyl acetate-based strip showed sustained IL-1β elevation at 24 h, whereas the IL-1β levels of the kaolin-based paste declined. Conversely, kaolin-based paste maintained elevated TNF-α levels at 24 h, whereas the polyvinyl acetate-based strip's TNF-α level decreased significantly.
conclusionBoth cordless retraction systems induced acute inflammation, with polyvinyl acetate-based strips causing prolonged IL-1β elevation and kaolin-based paste sustaining TNF-α levels. These findings suggest material-specific inflammatory responses, which can guide clinicians in selecting retraction systems to balance efficacy and periodontal health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.