A Short‐Term Clinical and Microbial Evaluation of Periodontal Therapy Associated With Amalgam Overhang Removal

Roman-Torres, Caio Vinícius Gonçalves; Cortelli, Sheila Cavalca; Araujo, Marcelo W B; Aquino, Davi Romeiro; Cortelli, José Roberto

doi:10.1902/jop.2006.050145

Cited by 18 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…31 From a microbiologic standpoint and similar to indirect restorations, 32 the elimination of amalgam overhangs during periodontal therapy caused a decrease of Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans and increase of Streptococcus mutans. 33 For indirect restorations, overhangs between 0.5 and 1 mm are associated with an increase in gingival inflammation 29 and a more apical crestal bone level, while overhangs of less than 0.2 mm are not. 32,34 Other studies showed that subgingival margins were associated with increased signs of gingival inflammation [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42] and, at times, increases in PD.…”

Section: Fixed Dental Restorations and Prosthesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental prostheses and tooth‐related factors

Ercoli

Caton

2018

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tooth anatomic factors, such as root abnormalities and fractures, and tooth relationships in the dental arch and with the opposing dentition can enhance plaque retention. Restoration margins located within the gingival sulcus do not cause gingivitis if patients are compliant with self-performed plaque control and periodic maintenance. Tooth-supported and/or tooth-retained restorations and their design, fabrication, delivery, and materials have often been associated with plaque retention and loss of attachment. Hypersensitivity reactions can occur to dental materials. Restoration margins placed within the junctional epithelium and supracrestal connective tissue attachment can be associated with inflammation and, potentially, recession. However, the evidence in several of the reviewed areas, especially related to the biologic mechanisms by which these factors affect the periodontium, is not conclusive. This highlights the need for additional well-controlled animal studies to elucidate biologic mechanisms, as well as longitudinal prospective human trials. Adequate periodontal assessment and treatment, appropriate instructions, and motivation in self-performed plaque control and compliance to maintenance protocols appear to be the most important factors to limit or avoid potential negative effects on the periodontium caused by fixed and removable prostheses.

show abstract

Section: Fixed Dental Restorations and Prosthesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental prostheses and tooth‐related factors

Ercoli

Caton

2018

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The response of the gingival tissues to restorative procedures has been related to the restorative margin location and contour, presence of overhangs and surface roughness, and the type of restorative materials. [2][3][4][5] Some studies 4,6 have shown that subgingival restorations may show a greater association with gingival bleeding, attachment loss, and gingival recession than supragingival restorations. Other studies [6][7][8] have also shown that unfavorable periodontal reactions are more pronounced, even in clinically acceptable restorations, well-adapted subgingival fillings, and patients receiving regular preventive dental care.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Glass Ionomer and Microfilled Composite Subgingival Restorations on Periodontal Tissue and Subgingival Biofilm: A 6‐Month Evaluation

Santos

Lucchesi

Cortelli

et al. 2007

Journal of Periodontology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has also been shown that overhanging restorations play a role in the extent of periodontal breakdown . Overhanging restorations result in anatomical changes, which may create a more favorable environment for periodontitis‐associated bacteria . Furthermore, galvanic corrosion due to a lower of pH in the crevice may result in leakage of metal ions into the gingival crevice and tissues .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,4,5 Overhanging restorations result in anatomical changes, which may create a more favorable environment for periodontitis-associated bacteria. 6,7 Furthermore, galvanic corrosion due to a lower of pH in the crevice 8 may result in leakage of metal ions into the gingival crevice and tissues. 9,10 As a result, this could influence bacterial adhesion, toxicity and induce allergies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative and quantitative differences in the subgingival microbiome of the restored and unrestored teeth

Rademacher

Zaura

Kleverlaan

et al. 2019

J of Periodontal Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective Metal‐based dental restorations with a subgingival outline may enhance plaque accumulation and bacterial colonization. This study aimed to investigate whether metal‐based restorations influence the composition of subgingival microbiome. Material and Methods Per subject one site with a metal‐based restoration and one contra‐lateral site without a restoration were selected on basis of radiographic bone loss ≤2 mm, restoration outline at sulcus level/subgingivally, pocket depth ≤4 mm, and no root canal treatments. Subgingival samples were collected with sterile paper‐points, and microbial profiles were obtained by 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. Restorations were sampled with an Arkansas‐stone and the metal composition was determined using energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy. Results A total of 22 sites from 11 subjects were included. No significant differences for the clinical parameters were found between the restored and unrestored sites. The average age of the restorations was 14.9 ± 7.1 years. Firmicutes was the most prevalent phylum at the restored sites (32% vs 20% of the reads of the unrestored sites, P = 0.016), and Actinobacteria at the unrestored sites (33% vs 18% of the reads of the restored sites, P = 0.01). Overall, sequences clustered into 573 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). Species richness of the restored sites was significantly higher than species richness of the unrestored sites (117 ± 32 and 96 ± 20 OTUs, respectively, P = 0.013). No associations between the metal composition and bacterial profiles were found. Conclusion This study shows that metal‐based restorations may enhance colonization of Firmicutes and the neighboring pocket may harbor more diverse microbial communities.

show abstract

A Short‐Term Clinical and Microbial Evaluation of Periodontal Therapy Associated With Amalgam Overhang Removal

Cited by 18 publications

References 38 publications

Dental prostheses and tooth‐related factors

Dental prostheses and tooth‐related factors

Effects of Glass Ionomer and Microfilled Composite Subgingival Restorations on Periodontal Tissue and Subgingival Biofilm: A 6‐Month Evaluation

Qualitative and quantitative differences in the subgingival microbiome of the restored and unrestored teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About