TITLE

Dental post-operative sensitivity associated with a gallium-based restorative material

AUTHOR(S)
Dunne, S.; Abraham, R.
PUB. DATE
September 2000
SOURCE
British Dental Journal;9/23/2000, Vol. 189 Issue 6, p310
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Introduction This study forms part of a 2-year longitudinal clinical trial to compare the performance of a gallium-based restorative material (Galloy) with a high copper, mercury based (Dispersalloy) control material. Method Following Ethical Committee approval, 25 galloy restorations and 25 Dispersalloy controls were placed in 14 adult patients, by a single operator. The cavities were of moderate size, indicating the use of amalgam as the restorative material. All restorations were polished within 1 week of placement, photographed and a silicone impression of the tooth and restoration recorded. In addition, a visual analogue scale (VAS), indicating the extent of any post-operative sensitivity, was completed by each patient for each restoration, immediately prior to polishing. A score of 0 indicated no sensitivity, while a score of 10 indicated the greatest possible sensitivity. At 6-month recall, the VAS scores, silicone impressions and photographs were repeated. Results The mean sensitivity scores for the galloy and Dispersalloy restorations at 1 weekwere 5.1 (+/-3.4) and 1.0 (+/-1.5), respectively and at 6 months, 1.8 (+/-3.0) and 0.2 (+/-0.1) respectively. The differences between these means at 1 week and at 6 months were significant (P < 0.01). Conclusion Galloy restorations were associated with a much greater severity of post-operative sensitivity than Dispersalloy restorations.
ACCESSION #
9354014

 

Related Articles

  • A study into the performance of a gallium-based restorative material. Shortall, A; Shaini, F // British Dental Journal;9/23/2000, Vol. 189 Issue 6, p306 

    Introduction This study forms part of a 2-year longitudinal clinical trial to compare the performance of a gallium-based restorative material (Galloy) with a high copper, mercury based (Dispersalloy) control material. Method Following Ethical Committee approval, 25 Galloy restorations and 25...

  • Direct-placement gallium restorative alloy: A 3-year clinical evaluation. Osborne, John W.; Summitt, James B. // Quintessence International;Jan1999, Vol. 30 Issue 1, p49 

    Objective: A pilot clinical study on a direct-placement gallium restorative alloy was initiated with nine patients who signed a consent form. Method and materials: Thirty Class I restorations were placed and assessed over a 3-year period. The cavity preparations and surface of the restorations...

  • Clinical evaluation of gallium alloy as a posterior restorative material. Navarro, Maria Fidela L.; Franco, Eduardo B.; Bastos, Pedro A. M.; Teixeira, Luiz C.; Carvalho, Ricardo M. // Quintessence International;May1996, Vol. 27 Issue 5, p315 

    This study evaluated 30 gallium alloy (Gallium alloy GF) and 31 amalgam (Dispersalloy) restorations over a period of 8 months in both Class I and Class II cavity preparations in 28 human subjects. At baseline, all gallium alloy and amalgam restorations were considered acceptable (Alfa) in terms...

  • THE REINFORCED COMPOSITE POST AND CORE. Kroll, Robert G. // Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA);May2000, Vol. 131 Issue 5, p667 

    Focuses on the restoration of an endodontically treated tooth. Possible problems; Development of bonded composite materials; Tips for dentists.

  • editorial. Swain, Michael V. // New Zealand Dental Journal;Jun2010, Vol. 106 Issue 2, p41 

    The author reflects on the development and the use of dental materials in the restorative dentistry in New Zealand. The author states that dental practitioners must develop a basic understanding of the materials they use and take precautions on the manufacturers' claims about the efficacy and...

  • Crowns and extra-coronal restorations: Materials selection. Wassell, R.W.; Walls, A.W.G.; Steele, J.G. // British Dental Journal;2/23/2002, Vol. 192 Issue 4, p199 

    Materials selection is the second in the series on crowns and other extra-coronal restorations. Some of us are less than inspired by dental materials science. Nevertheless, many of the things that concern us clinically with crowns and their alternatives are based on material properties. We worry...

  • Histological review of the human cellular cementum with special reference to an alternating lamellar pattern. Yamamoto, Tsuneyuki; Li, Minqi; Liu, Zhucheng; Guo, Ying; Hasegawa, Tomoka; Masuki, Hideo; Suzuki, Reiko; Amizuka, Norio // Odontology;Jul2010, Vol. 98 Issue 2, p102 

    Cementum is mineralized tissue with collagen fibrils as its major organic component, and it can be roughly classified into acellular and cellular cementum. The latter generally consists of a stack of cellular intrinsic fiber cementum layers, in which intensely and weakly stained lamellae (each...

  • Changing restorative traditions: The use of bases and liners. Leinfelder, Karl F. // Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA);Jan1994, Vol. 125 Issue 1, p65 

    Discusses the use of bases and liners in operative dentistry. Differences between base and lining materials; Advantages and disadvantages of both restorative agents; Factors contributing to the decrease in the number of clinicians in the United States that used bases and liners routinely.

  • Choosing intracoronal restorative materials.  // Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA);Jan1994, Vol. 125 Issue 1, p102 

    Presents a summary of choices available for restorations of occlusal and Class V lesions in posterior teeth. Types of restorative materials; Need for the practitioner to be aware of the biocompatibility and possible incidents of allergic reactions that may result from restorative materials.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics