The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2008 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Influence of Kinetic Cavity Preparation Devices on Dental Topography: An in vitro Study

Lucianne Cople Maia, Livia Azeredo A. Antunes, Áurea Simone Barrôso Vieira, Márcia Peraira Alves dos Santos

Citation Information : Maia LC, Antunes LA, Vieira ÁS, dos Santos MP. Influence of Kinetic Cavity Preparation Devices on Dental Topography: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008; 9 (2):146-154.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-9-2-146

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-02-2008

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2008; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The objectives of this study were to assess the influence of four different kinetic cavity preparation devices on cavity preparation taking into account tip angulation, internal tip diameter, and distance to the dental substrate. The dental topography itself was also evaluated after the use of these devices.

Methods and Materials

Quantitative parameters using pertinent statistical tests as well as qualitative parameters were used to assess the topography in terms of the dispersion halo effect (DHE), size, and depth of the preparation.

Results

The DHE did not present differences among the groups. In relation to the preparation size, the internal diameter influenced 120° point angles, whereas distance influenced the 90° ones. Considering the preparation depth, the 90° point angle yielded the deepest. In the qualitative analysis, both angles provided cavity preparations with rounded cavosurface angles. The 120° point angles yielded inclined, shallow V-shaped preparations, whereas the 90° angles presented U-shaped preparations reaching the dentin. The enamel had an irregular aspect and exposed prisms; dentin had a loose smear layer with aluminum oxide residues.

Conclusion

The kind of device may influence the kinetic cavity design.

Clinical Significance

It is the clinician that knows how to select the appropriate devices to adopt in order to achieve the desired cut, depth, and shape of cavity preparations.

Citation

Antunes LAA, Vieira ASB, Alves dos Santos MP, Maia LC. Influence of Kinetic Cavity Preparation Devices on Dental Topography: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 February;(9)2:146-154.


PDF Share
  1. Air abrasion: an emerging standard of care in conservative operative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2002; 46(2):185-209.
  2. Air abrasive microdentistry: a new perspective on restorative dentistry. Dent Econ 1995; 85(9):96-7.
  3. Dentine caries excavation: a review of current clinical techniques. Br Dent J 2000; 188(9):476-82.
  4. Air-abrasive technology: its new role in restorative dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1994; 125(5):551-7.
  5. Selective caries removal with air abrasion. Oper Dent 1998; 23(5): 236-43.
  6. Caries removal techniques and instrumentation: a review. Clin Oral Invest 1998; 2(4):148-54.
  7. Techinic for nonmechanical preparation of cavities and prophylaxis. J Am Dent Assoc 1945; 32(8):955-63.
  8. Dental enamel: qualitative evaluation of the surface after application of aluminum oxide (microetching) using the scanning electron microscope. Pesq Odontol Bras 2000; 14(4):334-9.
  9. Airabrasive: some fundamentals. J Am Dent Assoc 1950; 41(6):701-10.
  10. Scanning electron micrographic effects of air-abrasion cavity preparation on human enamel and dentin. Quintessence Int 1995; 26(2):139-44.
  11. Minimally invasive dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134(1):87-95.
  12. Effect of handpiece tip design on the cutting efficiency of an air abrasion system. Am J Dent 2001; 14(6):397-401.
  13. Evaluation of cutting patterns produced with airabrasion systems using different tip designs. Oper Dent 2001; 26(3):308-12.
  14. Case report: air abrasion cavity preparations for caries removal in paediatric dentistry. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2007; 8(Suppl 1):12-4.
  15. Evaluation of cutting patterns produced in primary teeth by an air-abrasion system. Quintessence Int 2002; 33(4):279-83.
  16. Influence of different parameters on the effectiveness of substance removal by using air abrasion. J Dent Res 1997;76:165; Abstr 1214.
  17. Effectiveness of high speed instrument and air abrasion on different dental substrates. Bras Oral Res. (in press).
  18. The abrasive technique: a report. Br Dent J 1954; 7:291-5.
  19. Effect of certain abrasive materials on tooth enamel. J Dent Res 1950; 29:740-8.
  20. Evaluation of different methods for cleaning and preparing occlusal fissures. Oper Dent 1999; 24(6):331-6.
  21. A clinical evaluation of air-abrasion treatment of questionable carious lesions: A 12-month report. Am Dent Assoc 2001;132(6):762-9.
  22. Kinetic cavity preparation effects on secondary caries formation around resin restorations: a polarized light microscopic in vitro evaluation. ASDC J Dent Child 2001; 68(2):115-21.
  23. Quintessence Int 1998;29(1):5-11.
  24. Histopathologic effects of kinetic cavity preparation for the removal of enamel and dentin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1995; 80(2):214-25.
  25. Morphological characteristics of enamel and dentin prepared with air abrasion. J Dent Res 1996;75:127; Abstr 877.
  26. Bond strengths of resin to enamel and dentin treated with low-pressure air abrasion. Oper Dent 1996;21(5):218-24.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.