Radiographic Applications in Forensic Dental Identification
Michael J. Thali M.D., Mark D. Viner, B. G. Brogdon in Brogdon's Forensic Radiology, 2010
Most dentists agree in principle that an individual's dentition is unique when taken as a whole and assuming all or most of the teeth remain.8 Any variation from the norm is helpful when attempting to make a dental identification, but changes seen resulting from dental restoration of the structures is by far preferred over normal anatomical landmarks in making dental matches. There are 32 permanent teeth with 5 surfaces per tooth. There are numerous ways to restore each of the 5 tooth surfaces or replace missing teeth with a great variety of dental materials: amalgam (silver), composite resins, cements, root canals, crowns, bridges, removable partial dentures, and dental implants. As these surfaces are assessed one by one, the weight of the findings mounts statistically. In addition to the restorative material, radiographs taken of the teeth with fillings in place will show the internal forms or shapes of restorations. Most forensic odontologists would rather have one tooth with a large filling than 32 with none. Indeed, dental identifications are occasionally made through the appearance of a single restored tooth.
Mouth, lips, and perioral region
Robin Lewallen, Adele Clark, Steven R. Feldman in Clinical Handbook of Contact Dermatitis, 2014
Historical clues are also extremely helpful in this setting. Recent exposure to dental materials, metals, or plastic sources should be considered significant and patch testing should be initiated. This is particularly important in localized lichenoid dermatitis in close proximity to the suspected oral implant or prosthesis. Areas that should be considered most suggestive for oral contact lichenoid reactions are the lateral tongue and buccal mucosa. These are the areas in closest proximity to amalgams (fillings) and most prosthetic devices.1 Metals used in dentistry are most often mercury, nickel, gold, cobalt, palladium, and chromium. Sources of exposure to these metals include dentures, braces, crowns, and fillings (amalgams). It is important to search for foreign materials through history and physical exam; and if present, patch testing and removal of offending agent can be of great benefit. Other causes of oral lichenoid contact dermatitis include flavorings (with cinnamon being the classic example) and dental adhesives (acrylates).2 Allergy to acrylates from dental prostheses may also cause tingling or jaw pain.3
Impact of Dental Caries on Survival of Polymeric Restorations
Mary Anne S. Melo in Designing Bioactive Polymeric Materials for Restorative Dentistry, 2020
The replacement of dental structure lost due to caries disease or injuries represents a large part of general clinical practice worldwide. Dental materials can reconstruct the tooth structure lost and restore the function and aesthetic of the dental element. Moreover, it is assumed that dental materials can also play an additional function, i.e., helping in the control of (secondary) caries lesion incidence in tooth surface (Cenci et al., 2008, 2009; Weir et al., 2012, 2017; Melo et al., 2013). Figure 3.5 exemplifies the target location of investigated developing bioactive materials. Overall, the remineralizing and antibacterial polymeric materials are intended to act at the interface tooth/restoration.
Interaction between microorganisms and dental material surfaces: general concepts and research progress
Published in Journal of Oral Microbiology, 2023
Yan Tu, Huaying Ren, Yiwen He, Jiaqi Ying, Yadong Chen
Nowadays, with developments in science and technology, the model of the biofilm formation described above gradually shows limitations. Karin Sauer et al. [18] reported that although the previous model of biofilm formation was easy to understand, this model did not reflect the relevant microenvironments that develop within these biofilms. They depicted three major steps of biofilm growth: aggregation, growth, and disaggregation. We have noticed that the new model does not consider the surface a necessary condition for biofilm formation. In the oral environment, bacteria are mainly distributed on the enamel and dental material surfaces [19]. Some biofilms may exist in flowing saliva without a surface [18]. However, in the oral environment, because the biofilm in flowing saliva is difficult to study, researchers will pay more attention to the relationship between dental materials and microorganisms. Therefore, in this review, we will focus on the surface of dental materials.
Prediction of abrasive wears behavior of dental composites using an artificial neural network
Published in Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 2023
Abhijeet Shivaji Suryawanshi, Niranjana Behera
Tobacco and artificial saliva were mixed in equal proportions to prepare a solution to immerse the pin specimens in it. A pH meter was used to measure the pH of the tobacco solution at room temperature (Sajewicz 2009). The pH of the solution was maintained constant throughout the immersion process. Table 1 summarizes the main compositions of the selected dental materials. The wear characteristics were evaluated after 2, 3.5, 6, 15, and 30 days of immersion, which represented the actual contact of material and tobacco solution for 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, and 5 months, respectively. Testing of materials was carried out on artificial saliva only for recording the baseline reading. Figure 2 summarizes the wear of four composite materials at various immersion intervals (Suryawanshi and Behera, 2020; Suryawanshi and Behera 2021).
Finite element analysis and nanomechanical properties of composite and ceramic dental onlays
Published in Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 2022
Cem Peskersoy, Heval Makbule Sahan
Resin composite-based materials (RCMs) are widely used dental materials because of their aesthetic quality bonding to tooth structure, easy manipulation and application procedures (da Veiga et al. 2016). The main advantages of RCMs compared with ceramics include decreased antagonistic wear, lower brittleness and frequency of catastrophic failures and less chipping and crack formation during the fabrication process (Demarco et al. 2017). However, polymerization shrinkage and cyclical fatigue loading are the main shortcomings of composite based materials, which may eventually cause residual stresses, fractures and failures in restored teeth (Angeletaki et al. 2016, Borgia et al. 2019). Polymerization shrinkage, ranging from 1.5% to 3% of the total material volume, is a major problem that causes restrained contraction and misdistribution of the occlusal forces (Zhu et al. 2017). The restrained contraction produces stresses, which can exceed the cohesive and adhesive strength values of the restorative materials themselves (Pucci et al. 2012). Stress can also interfere with the adhesive interface, enamel or dentin substrate (Kaisarly et al. 2021). The use of lower modulus RCMs as a flexible stress breaker has been presented to render the release of such stresses and can thus be adopted as a tool to not only reduce composite restoration deterioration but also decrease the wear resistance and fracture toughness of the composite material (Ausiello et al. 2019; Cerda-Rizo et al. 2019).
Related Knowledge Centers
- Clove
- Contraindication
- Dental Cement
- Dentistry
- Eugenol
- Root Canal Treatment
- Toothache
- Zinc Oxide Eugenol
- Composite Material
- Pulp