An interventional study of Group A: Cordless paste with astringent (EXP): Expasyl (Acteon PVT LTD) and Group B: Cordless paste without astringent (MF): Magic FoamCord (Coltene Whaledent AG) in Data Accuracy, Bleeding Control, sponsored by Istanbul University. Completed at 3 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 25 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-08.
Sponsored by Istanbul University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The study aims to identify which retraction method offers optimal balance between tissue displacement, scan clarity, and patient comfort, particularly in the esthetic zone, while avoiding the use of CBCT. Results will guide clinicians in selecting the most effective and minimally invasive approach for digital impression workflows.
This prospective clinical study investigates the impact of various gingival retraction techniques on scan accuracy, gingival displacement, bleeding control, and finish line visibility during intraoral scanning of anterior teeth. A total of 32 systemically and periodontally healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of five groups, each using a different retraction method:
Digital impressions were obtained before and after retraction using a Trios 3Shape intraoral scanner. The gingival displacement was measured digitally, and scan accuracy was analyzed via RMS error. Bleeding index, finish line visibility, and patient discomfort (VAS) were also recorded.
Istanbul University is the lead sponsor of 496 studies on the registry; 79 are open to participants now.
Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 1 (20%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
gingival retraction model 1 Expasyl (Acteon PVT LTD)
Procedure: Group A: Cordless paste with astringent (EXP): Expasyl (Acteon PVT LTD)
gingival retraction model 2 Magic FoamCord (Coltene Whaledent AG)
Procedure: Group B: Cordless paste without astringent (MF): Magic FoamCord (Coltene Whaledent AG)
gingival retraction model 3 Diode laser (iLase; Biolase Inc.)
Procedure: Group C: Laser troughing (LT): Diode laser (iLase; Biolase Inc.)
control-Knitted cord impregnated with aluminum chloride (Ultrapak + Viscostat Clear; Ultradent Inc.)
Procedure: Group D: Retraction cord with astringent (RCA; Control group): Knitted cord impregnated with aluminum chloride (Ultrapak + Viscostat Clear; Ultradent Inc.)
Chemical gingival retraction method
Chemical gingival retraction method
Gingival retraction will be performed by using only laser. Cord will not be used.
Mechanical and chemical gingival retraction method will be used.
gingival displacement
Vertical and horizontal gingival displacement before and after gingival retraction method will be measured by using digital caliper.
Time frame: 30 days
Plan to share: Yes — patient's data obtained from study
Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Istanbul University