Literature DB >> 10666967

Iatrogenic damage to approximal surfaces in contact with Class II restorations.

V A Medeiros1, R P Seddon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the frequency of iatrogenic damage to approximal surfaces in contact with Class II restorations.
METHODS: Patients (n = 28) with a Class II restoration in contact with an unrestored surface had elastic separators fitted interproximally. Contralateral (unrestored) control surfaces were also separated. Impressions (light body polyvinylsiloxane) of the separated surfaces were taken 3-6 days later. Interproximal impressions (28 paired, seven unpaired) were examined by binocular microscope and scanning electron microscope (SEM) for iatrogenic damage, attrition and cavitation due to caries.
RESULTS: 49-60% of surfaces adjacent to Class II restorations had been iatrogenically damaged. The most frequent types of damage were vertical grooves (26%), extensive damage (17%), indentations (6%) and scratches (6%). Damage was more frequent in maxillary teeth (61%) than mandibular teeth (25%), in permanent teeth (60%) more than deciduous teeth (20%). Qualified dentists produced more iatrogenic damage (64%) than undergraduate students (23%).
CONCLUSION: The frequency of iatrogenic damage to approximal surfaces following Class II preparations was 49%, and possibly as much as 60% when questionably damaged surfaces were included. Protection of the adjacent enamel is of paramount importance during Class II cavity preparation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10666967     DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(99)00061-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent        ISSN: 0300-5712            Impact factor:   4.379


  6 in total

1.  Handpiece and bur skills evaluation during an introductory Clinical Skills Programme in a graduate-entry dental school: a pilot study.

Authors:  J I Foley; J Drummie
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2012-06

2.  Iatrogenic damage to the adjacent surfaces of primary molars, in three different ways of cavity preparation.

Authors:  M Lenters; W E van Amerongen; G J Mandari
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2006-03

3.  Prophylometric and SEM analyses of four different finishing methods.

Authors:  G Chiodera; F Cerutti; A Cerutti; A Putignano; F Mangani
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2013-03-19

4.  Use of simulators in operative dental education: experience in southern Nigeria.

Authors:  Abiodun Arigbede; Obafunke Denloye; Oluwole Dosumu
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 0.927

5.  Minimal intervention dentistry II: part 1. Contribution of the operating microscope to dentistry.

Authors:  Y Sitbon; T Attathom; A J St-Georges
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 1.626

6.  Posterior composites and new caries on adjacent surfaces - any association? Longitudinal study with a split-mouth design.

Authors:  Rasa Skudutyte-Rysstad; Anne Bjørg Tveit; Ivar Espelid; Simen E Kopperud
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 2.757

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.