Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “TOOTH ABRASION”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 361 records · Page 20Linked to original sources
PubMed1990

Sensitivity restored of Class V abrasion/erosion lesions.

The effectiveness of restorative treatment in reducing sensitivity associated with the Class V erosion/abrasion lesion was evaluated and the efficacy of three tooth-colored restorative materials in reducing sensitivity was compared. The 108 lesions were restored with either glass ionomer restorative material, composite resin with a dentin bonding agent, or composite resin with a dentin bonding agent and a glass ionomer liner. Composite resin with glass-ionomer liner restorations significantly reduced sensitivity to air and hot and cold water. Glass ionomer restorations and restorations with composite resin and a dentin bonding agent significantly reduced sensitivity but were also associated with increased sensitivity to air and cold respectively in 20% to 30% of the lesions restored when evaluated at 6 months.

Adhesives↗
PubMed1993

How dentists classified and treated non-carious cervical lesions.

All North Carolina general dentists were shown color photographs of three non-carious cervical lesions. A fourth picture showed cervical caries. Respondents were asked how they defined each lesion, its cause, treatment and frequency of appearance in practice. Cervical caries was identified and treated by almost all responding dentists, but they applied more varied terms, causes and treatments to non-carious defects.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1995

Dental erosion.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Beverages↗
PubMed2000

Restoring esthetics and anterior guidance in worn anterior teeth. A conservative multidisciplinary approach.

BACKGROUND: Developments in adhesive dentistry have given the dental profession new restorative materials and technology to restore esthetics and function to the worn anterior dentition. This article illustrates, through a clinical case study, the clinical requirements for restoring esthetic harmony and functional stability to the worn anterior dentition. CASE DESCRIPTION: The author presents the case of a 24-year-old man who sought esthetic dental treatment because he was unhappy with the appearance of his maxillary anterior teeth. The review of his dental history revealed that he ground his teeth at night. The author performed a complete evaluation of the causes of the patient's bruxism and created a diagnostic preview to, among other things, develop the relationship between the condylar and anterior guidance and to establish the esthetic requirements for the final restorations. Treatment included periodontal recontouring, tooth preparation and placement of temporary and then permanent restorations; the patient also was given an occlusal guard to protect the restorations against future bruxing. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Whatever the cause of occlusal instability, it is important that the restorative dentist be able to recognize its signs--such as tooth hypermobility, tooth wear, periodontal breakdown, occlusal dimpling, stress fractures, exostosis, muscle enlargement and loss of posterior disclusion. When restoring the worn dentition, the clinician should bear in mind the five P's: proper planning prevents poor performance.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Clinical evaluation of two one-bottle dentin adhesives at three years.

BACKGROUND: The method currently used to adhere resin to dentin involves etching, priming and bonding. Many commercial adhesives now combine priming and bonding functions in a single solution, and these are frequently called one-bottle adhesives. The purpose of this study was to compare the 36-month clinical performance of two commercial one-bottle adhesives. METHODS: The authors enrolled 33 patients with noncarious cervical lesions in the study. A total of 101 lesions were restored with either a filled, ethanol-based adhesive (OptiBond Solo, SDS Kerr) or an unfilled, acetone-based adhesive (Prime & Bond 2.1, Dentsply Caulk) and a hybrid resin-based composite. Enamel margins were not beveled, and no mechanical retention was placed. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and six months, 18 months and 36 months after placement using modified Cvar/Ryge criteria. RESULTS: The retention rates at 36 months were 93.3 percent for the ethanol-based adhesive and 89.4 percent for the acetone-based adhesive. The difference in retention rates was not statistically significant. In both groups, 12 percent of the retained restorations had marginal staining, but no recurrent caries was detected around any restoration. Other restoration characteristics such as marginal adaptation and color match remained excellent three years after placement. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of both adhesives was excellent during this 36-month clinical trial. At the most recent recall evaluation (that is, 36 months), the filled, ethanol-based adhesive exhibited slightly better bond durability, but the difference between the two materials was not statistically significant. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The one-bottle adhesives evaluated in this study provided excellent clinical retention of Class V restorations without mechanical retention. When the materials are used properly, restorations are retained at a high rate during at least three years of clinical service.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Abfraction.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Dental Enamel↗
PubMed2002

Characteristics of noncarious cervical lesions: a clinical investigation.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the authors' in vivo investigation was to analyze the characteristics of noncarious cervical lesions, or NCCLs, in adult patients who had a high incidence of them. METHODS: The patient pool consisted of a total of 57 patients and 171 teeth (three teeth per patient), with one NCCL per tooth. The characteristics the authors evaluated were shape, dimensions, sensitivity, sclerosis and occlusion. RESULTS: In terms of lesion characteristics, 91 percent of the lesions had axial depths of 1 to 2 millimeters, 49 percent had occlusogingival widths of 1 to 2 mm, 74 percent had an angular shape of 45 to 135 degrees, 76 percent had mild or moderate sclerosis, and 73 percent had no or mild sensitivity. In terms of occlusion, 75 percent of teeth had an Angle Class I occlusion on the involved side, 60 percent had group function or mixed excursive guidance, 82 percent had wear facets, and 99 percent had Type 0 or I mobility. In terms of tooth location, 70 percent of NCCLs were on posterior teeth, 65 percent were on maxillary teeth, and 46 percent were on premolars. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated NCCLs were found mainly to have small dimensions of depth and width (< 2 mm) and to be roughly right-angled in shape, and many had sclerosis and low sensitivity. A majority of the dentitions studied had Class I occlusion, with group function, prevalent wear facets, and little or no mobility. Cervical lesions were more common with posterior maxillary teeth and premolars, especially first premolars, which had the highest prevalence of lesions. Older patients were more likely to exhibit noncarious cervical lesions, but no great difference in incidence was found between men and women. Clinical Implications. A knowledge of the NCCL characteristics and etiologic covariables aids in proper case selection for treatment, aids in selection of appropriate treatment protocols and improves assessment of prognosis.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Noncarious cervical lesions and abfractions: a re-evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The concept of abfraction is controversial. The authors present the fundamental basis of abfraction and review studies that describe the condition. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors used data on masticatory forces, enamel and dentin properties, as well as stress studies related to abfraction, for background information. They also analyzed the genesis of the abfraction theory, experimental evidence, case presentations, clinical investigations and restorative studies. RESULTS: The theory of abfraction is based primarily on engineering analyses that demonstrate theoretical stress concentration at the cervical areas of teeth. While some recent stress studies support earlier findings, others have provided significant deviating information. Few controlled studies exist that demonstrate the relationship between occlusal loading and abfraction lesions. The role of occlusal loading in noncarious cervical lesions (as shown by clinical data) appears to be part of a multifactorial event that may not necessarily follow the proposed classic abfraction mechanism, and other mechanisms or factors may explain cervical restoration failure just as well. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: There is little direct evidence supporting the theory of abfraction as the primary factor in the formation of noncarious cervical lesions. Controlled clinical trials are necessary to elucidate more fully the etiology of those lesions.

Bite Force↗
PubMed2004

A three-year clinical evaluation of two dentin bonding agents.

BACKGROUND: A new restorative called a "giomer composite" has been introduced. The authors conducted a study to determine retention, anatomical form, caries, staining, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, surface roughness and sensitivity of giomer compared with those of a microfilled composite. METHODS: The authors placed 40 sets of restorations randomly in canines and premolars in vivo. They used a giomer composite and a microfilled composite in erosion/abrasion/abfraction Class V lesions that were not altered with rotary instruments. They placed the restorations according to manufacturer's recommendations, and two calibrated examiners evaluated the restorations independently using modified U.S. Public Health Service criteria at baseline and at six, 18 and 36 months. The lesions receiving the restorations did not differ from each other in the amount of circumferential enamel present, the percentage of the surface area of dentin or lesion type. RESULTS: There were no differences in the restorations at baseline, an evaluation made two weeks after placement. At 36 months, the giomer and microfilled composite restorations were not significantly different from one another in any of the eight criteria evaluated. The percentage agreement between examiners was at least 83 percent for each criterion in each evaluation period. CONCLUSIONS: Both the giomer and the microfilled composite used in this study meet the clinical portion of the Acceptance Program Guidelines for Dentin and Enamel Adhesives Materials established by the American Dental Association. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Both the giomer and the microfilled composite used in this study can be used with confidence in Class V lesions.

Adult↗