Relationship Between Proximal Tooth Open Contacts and Periodontal Disease

Abstract

ONE HUNDRED FOUR adult subjects (mean age 42.8 years, SD = 16.3 years) with unilateral open contacts were assessed interproximally for periodontal status at both the open and contralateral closed contact. An open contact was defined by unrestricted passage of unwaxed dental floss through the interproximal area. Gingival index, crevicular bleeding, probing depth, attachment level, debris, calculus and tendency for food impaction in each study area were recorded. Less debris was seen at open contacts (P less than 0.001). However, increased probing depth (0.27 mm, P = 0.002) and attachment loss (0.48 mm, P less than 0.001) were found at the open contacts. Small but statistically significant relationships were observed between side to side differences in food impaction and both probing depth (P = 0.005) and attachment level (P = 0.006). Differences in calculus index and attachment level were associated similarly (P = 0.003).

The Influence of Matrix Type on the Proximal Contact in Class II Resin Composite Restorations

“…[3][4][5] In vivo, the contact strength is influenced by several factors, including tooth type, location of the tooth, time of day, 3 postural change, 28 periodontal condition of the tooth 29 and showing a high individual variability. The foregoing parameters are difficult to simulate in laboratory conditions and, at the same time, their impact cannot be easily assessed in vivo.…”

“…[1][2] This objective pertains to reproducing the natural proximal contour of a contact that is tight enough to prevent food impaction, which is crucial for the healthy maintenance of underlying periodontal tissues. [3][4][5] Increased gingival inflammation and attachment loss, apart from the presence of overhanging restorations, [6][7] have also been attributed to plaque accumulation due to loose proximal contacts. [5][6] However, alveolar bone loss is not directly attributed to open interproximal contacts but is strongly related to the overall periodontal status of the patient.…”

“…[3][4][5] Increased gingival inflammation and attachment loss, apart from the presence of overhanging restorations, [6][7] have also been attributed to plaque accumulation due to loose proximal contacts. [5][6] However, alveolar bone loss is not directly attributed to open interproximal contacts but is strongly related to the overall periodontal status of the patient. 8 Annoyance and discomfort have been reported by patients who experience food impaction 4 at sites of open contact.…”

Comparison of Proximal Contact and Contours of Premolars restored with Composite Restoration using Circumferential Matrix Band with and without Separation Ring: A Randomized Clinical Trial

“…[1][2][3] In amalgam restorations, a tight proximal contact in a class II preparation can be obtained by condensation of the material but for resin-based composites, the same is not true. It has always remained a challenge for the dentists to obtain tight proximal contact with composites.…”

Gerodontology: An Interdisciplinary Approach

“…Open contacts between the crowns and the adjacent teeth/prosthesis should be avoided as chances of greater pocket depth and increased loss of clinical attachment levels were seen. This was confirmed in a study by Jernberg et al [18]. The crowns should not be overcontoured and should be as smooth as possible with supragingival margins wherever possible.…”