Can you evaluate it for me please to express your opinion and how to fix this? The patient is having sensitivity and refuses to go back to the other dentist. Is it cracked possibly? Hello Doctor, If a large filling falls out of the tooth not the first time is it possible to restore the tooth using retentive pins. Perhaps this is not the best comparison, but I think you know what I mean. I am not suggesting pins and crowns but a basic restoration. I would appreciate any comments you might make on this.
If the filling has fallen out and the cavity is large it is best to go for a Crown placement as it protect the remaining tooth structure. In case of previously filled teeth with a lost restoration the remaining tooth structure will be weak and the best possible solution is to replace with a crown. If the remaining tooth structure is strong enough to support a new restoration then it can be done using the above mentioned method of placing Retentive pins.
Thank you for your reply. I appreciate it. Because of your article about pin retained Amalgam Core Restoration, I was prepared to ask my family dentist about using this procedure for a restoration. He was receptive to the idea, took X-rays of that part of my mouth and proceeded.
I am confident he did a great job. Thank you for posting a brief article on the subject. Your email address will not be published. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. Share it! What is Hemisection in Dentistry. Loida Pacheco.
The area that has to receive a vertical pin should be flat and perpendicular to the long axis of the tooth, and it should present a zone of dentin which is sufficiently wide for the placement of a pin. In general, any area which is designed to receive a pin should be reduced enough to allow a pin length of 2. A cove is placed, to provide a sufficient bulk of amalgam all around Clinically, the tensile or the transverse strength, or both, may be of greater significance than the compressive strength Mahler ; Rodriguez and Dickson ; Mahler and Mitchem Pins which are positioned with long axes which are parallel to the tensile stresses do not result in any significant decrease in the tensile strength Going and others, A posterior tooth needs one to four pins.
In the event where a proximal wall is only partly missing, a pin should still be used if the reduced cusp is centric-bearing As seen in the report, the functional cusp palatal cusp in the maxillary premolar was replaced with a single pin. The position of a pin depends on several factors, first of which is the internal morphology of the cavity.
Secondly, the external morphology of the tooth must be considered. Thirdly, the anticipated bulk of the amalgam must be considered, since the pins which are placed in areas of greater bulk are less likely to weaken the amalgam Finally, the anticipated points of the occlusal load must be considered, since a vertical pin which is positioned directly below an occlusal load weakens the amalgam significantly Cecconi and Asgar, The prediction that the amalgam would not last until the end of the 20th century was wrong.
Conversely, recent studies have concluded that the combined amalgam-composite cusp coverage restoration showed acceptable clinical performance over a period of time 12 , Yet, amalgam continues to be the best bargain in the restorative armamentarium because of its durability and technique insensitivity. Amalgam will probably disappear eventually, but its disappearance will be brought about by a better and more aesthetic material, rather than by concerns over health hazards.
When it will disappear, it will have served dentistry and patients well for more than years. Conclusion Amalgam restorations have served the dentistry profession well and they will continue to do so in the years to come. In terms of longevity, they are probably superior to composite resins, especially when they are used for large restorations and cusp capping. The newer high copper single composition alloys offer superior properties, but they may not offer a good seal as the older amalgams.
Amalgam can be continued to be used as a material of choice if aesthetics is not a concern. Dental amalgam: An update. J Conserv Dent ; Pin vs. J Prosthet Dent ; 41 4 : Self-threading pin penetration into dentin.
J Prosthet Dent ; 43 3 : The influence of the amalgam alloy on the survival of amalgam restorations: A secondary analysis of multiple controlled clinical trials.
J Dent Res ; Long term survival of extensive amalgam restorations. The long-term survival and cost effectiveness of five dental restorative materials which were used in various classes of cavity preparations. International Dental Journal ; Causes of failure among the cuspal-coverage amalgam restorations: A clinical survey. J Am Dent Assoc ; Deliperi S, Bardwell DN.
Direct cuspal-coverage posterior resin composite restorations: a case report. Oper Dent ; 30 6 : Liebenberg WH. Assuring the restorative integrity in extensive posterior resin restorations: Pushing the envelope.
Quintessence Int ; Mondelli J, Vieira DF. The strength of Class II amalgam restorations with and without pins. J Prosthet Dent ; The pin-retained amalgam: a useful restoration for a large cavity or as a foundation of the crown.
Oper Dent ; 4: A three-year clinical evaluation of the cuspal coverage with combined composite-amalgam in endodontically-treated maxillary premolars. Oper Dent. A comparative evaluation of the combined amalgam and composite resin restorations in extensively carious vital posterior teeth: An in vivo study.
Users Online : Simple Search Advanced Search. Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards.
Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination.
Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal. Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary including all medical and dental specialities , e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April , it contained 67 manuscripts.
This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help.
JCDR provides authors help in this regards. Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR.
This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers. Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect.
To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them. It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it.
The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M. Shankar P. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March , which introduced the new electronic journal.
The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal. Over a span of over four years, we I and my colleagues have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1.
The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals.
Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in , before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed.
The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process.
The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review. Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed.
The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available.
The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors. Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened.
Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission Pre-publishing system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work.
Box , Kathmandu, Nepal. E-mail: ravi. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper. Thank you for hand-holding me through the process. Anuradha E-mail: anuradha2nittur gmail. Manjunath 1. Manish Kaushik Dept.
0コメント