| Literature DB >> 31575850 |
Haiyang Yu1, Yuwei Zhao2, Junying Li2, Tian Luo2, Jing Gao2, Hongchen Liu3, Weicai Liu4, Feng Liu5, Ke Zhao6, Fei Liu7, Chufan Ma8, Juergen M Setz9, Shanshan Liang10, Lin Fan2, Shanshan Gao2, Zhuoli Zhu2, Jiefei Shen2, Jian Wang2, Zhimin Zhu2, Xuedong Zhou11.
Abstract
By removing a part of the structure, the tooth preparation provides restorative space, bonding surface, and finish line for various restorations on abutment. Preparation technique plays critical role in achieving the optimal result of tooth preparation. With successful application of microscope in endodontics for >30 years, there is a full expectation of microscopic dentistry. However, as relatively little progress has been made in the application of microscopic dentistry in prosthodontics, the following assumptions have been proposed: Is it suitable to choose the tooth preparation technique under the naked eye in the microscopic vision? Is there a more accurate preparation technology intended for the microscope? To obtain long-term stable therapeutic effects, is it much easier to achieve maximum tooth preservation and retinal protection and maintain periodontal tissue and oral function health under microscopic vision? Whether the microscopic prosthodontics is a gimmick or a breakthrough in obtaining an ideal tooth preparation should be resolved in microscopic tooth preparation. This article attempts to illustrate the concept, core elements, and indications of microscopic minimally invasive tooth preparation, physiological basis of dental pulp, periodontium and functions involved in tool preparation, position ergonomics and visual basis for dentists, comparison of tooth preparation by naked eyes and a microscope, and comparison of different designs of microscopic minimally invasive tooth preparation techniques. Furthermore, a clinical protocol for microscopic minimally invasive tooth preparation based on target restorative space guide plate has been put forward and new insights on the quantity and shape of microscopic minimally invasive tooth preparation has been provided.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31575850 PMCID: PMC6802612 DOI: 10.1038/s41368-019-0057-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Oral Sci ISSN: 1674-2818 Impact factor: 6.344
Fig. 1The enamel thickness in esthetic area
Fig. 2Classification of targeted restorative space
Comparison of head-mounted microscope and dental operating microscope
| Item | Head-mounted microscope | Clinic microscope |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Low | High |
| Magnitude | Low and nonadjustable | Adjustable with wide ranges |
| Ergonomic | Good | Excellent |
| Illuminations | Non-coaxial | Coaxial, without shades |
| Digital assisting devices | None | Capable of mounting many devices |
Fig. 3Three-dimensional printing of equal-thickness targeted restorative space guide plate
Fig. 4Three-dimensional printing of non-equal thickness targeted restorative space guide plate to ensure the consistency of the depth of the depth calibrated drill into the guide
Fig. 5Three-dimensional (3D) printing of non-equal-thickness targeted restorative space (TRS) guide plate tooth preparation. a Original teeth. b Digital wax-up. c Cross-section view of 3D printing of non-equal-thickness TRS guide plate. d Overall view of 3D printing of non-equal-thickness TRS guide plate. e Preparing depth controlling holes with 3D printing TRS guide plate and depth calibrated drill f Depth controlling holes on the teeth surface
Fig. 6Tooth preparation burs and edge designs. a Chamfer edge. b Shoulder edge. c Feather edge
Pharmacological properties of the regular anesthetics
| Onset time/min | Duration time/min | Maximum dose/(mg·kg–1); absolute value/mg | Toxicity | Effect time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2% lidocaine (1:100 000 ratio with epinephrine) | 2–3 | 60 (Pulp) 180–300 (soft tissue) | 4.4 mg·kg–1; 300 mg | Low | Medium |
| 2% mepivacaine (1:20 000 ratio with norepinephrine) | 1.5–2 | 60 (Pulp) 180–300 (soft tissue) | 4.4 mg·kg–1; 300 mg | Low | Medium |
| 3% mepivacaine (no epinephrine added) | 1.5–2 | 20–40 (Pulp) 120–180 (soft tissue) | 4.4 mg·kg–1; 300 mg | Low | Short |
| 4% articaine (1:100 000 ratio with epinephrine) | 2–3 | 75 (Pulp) 180–300 (soft tissue) | 7.0 mg·kg–1; 500 mg | Low | Medium |
| 0.5% bupivacaine (1:200 000 ratio with epinephrine) | 6–10 | 90–180 (Pulp) 240–540 (soft tissue) | 1.3 mg·kg–1; 90 mg | High | Long |
| Tetracaine | 20 | 20–60 (soft tissue) | 20 mg | High | Short |
| Benzocaine | 0.5–2 | 5–15 (soft tissue) | unknown | Low | Short |