Abstract
After partial resection of the gingiva surrounding the tooth using an electrosurgical scalpel, various temporary filling materials were applied, and the wound surface repair state was compared. In a clinical study, each temporary filling material was applied to the wound after resection using an electrosurgical scalpel, and the wound surface repair state after about 2 weeks was observed. In an experimental study, the used temporary filling materials were implanted into the rat body, and tissue reactions were observed by microscopy. In addition, the antimicrobial effects of the temporary filling materials on pathogens of periodontal disease were evaluated. The following results were obtained.
1. In a clinical study, the gingival state was the healthiest using Hy-bond, and relatively good using Neodyne α and Caviton. However, redness and inflammation in the wound surface were often observed using Neodyne α while gingival proliferation due to wear was sometimes observed using Caviton. Detachment often occurred using Copack and gingival inflammation or proliferation was relatively often observed using Stopping.
2. In the rat body, marked inflammatory reactions to Hy-bond and Neodyne a were observed. Stopping and Copack were completely inert foreign materials, inducing capsulation.
3. Hy-bond, Neodyne α, and Caviton had definite antimicrobial effects, while Stopping had no antimicrobial effects.
