OPTICAL DEVICES IN ASSESSMENT OF DENTAL RESTORATION STATE

Udod O. A., Kibishauri M. V.

DENTISTRY

Scentific article

The assessment of clinical state involved examination of 456 direct restorations of posterior teeth from various materials. Evaluation was carried out applying visual and instrumental method, as well as dental operating microscope. Most of the restorations were made from photocomposite materials − 346 (75.9%), 71 restorations (15.6%) − from glass ionomer cements, and 39 (8.5%) − from chemical composites. The total number of restorations with impairments amounted to 292 (64%) while applying visual and instrumental examination method, in case of the use of optical equipment − 398 (87.2%). Visual and instrumental examination detected surface roughness in 35 restorations (89.7%) provided by chemically cured composites, examination with optical devices − in 39 restorations (100%); impaired marginal adaptation and marginal staining were observed in 33 restorations (84.6%) while applying visual and instrumental examination and with optical magnification − in 37 (94.9%), secondary caries − in 31 (79.5%) and 34 restored teeth (87.2%), respectively. Marginal staining was revealed in 52 restorations (73.2%) from glass ionomer cements in case of visual and instrumental examination and in 58 restorations (81.7%) − applying microscope, impaired marginal adaptation − 46 (64.8%) and 51 restorations (71.8 %), respectively, surface roughness − 44 (62%) and 49 restorations (69%), secondary caries was diagnosed, respectively, in 38 (53.5%) and 42 teeth (59.1%). In 175 photocomposite restorations (50.6%), surface roughness was detected with visual and instrumental method, compared to 187 restorations (54%), revealed with microscope; marginal staining was determined, respectively, in 168 (48.6%) and 185 restorations (53.5%), impaired marginal adaptation − in 153 (44.2%) and 177 (51.2%), secondary caries was diagnosed in 141 (40.8%) and 163 restored teeth (47.1%). In general, visualinstrumental examination detected 182 photocomposite restorations (52.6%) with impairments, optical devices − 257 (74.3%). The use of magnifying optical devices provides a more effective diagnosis of dental restoration disorders.

teeth, direct restorations, condition, impairment, optical devices, dental microscope.

1. Krejmer NM. Primenenie komp`yuterny`kh tekhnologij v stomatologii. Byulleten` mediczinskikh internet-konferenczij. 2015;11(5):1293. [in Russian].
2. Ry`zhova DV, Fadeev RA. Vliyanie sredstv opticheskogo uvelicheniya na zdorov`e stomatologov po danny`m literatury`. Vestnik Novgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. Yaroslava Mudrogo. 2016;6(97):107-10. [in Russian].
3. Mangani F, Putignano A, Cherutti A. Guidelines for adhesive dentistry. The key to success. Berlin: Quintessence Publishing; 2012. 416 p.
4. Nikolaev AI, Czepov LM. Prakticheskaya terapevticheskaya stomatologiya: uchebnoe posobie. 9-e izd. Moskva: «MEDpress-inform»; 2017. 928 s. [in Russian].
5. Shidakova AU, Khokhlova KM, Zotova AS. Ispol`zovanie operaczionnogo mikroskopa pri provedenii e`steticheskoj restavraczii zubov. Byulleten` mediczinskikh internet-konferenczij. 2017;11:1620. [in Russian].
6. Chukhraj IG, Novak NV, Marchenko EI. Oshibki i oslozhneniya, voznikayushhie pri izgotovlenii restavraczij iz kompoziczionny`kh materialov. Sovremennaya stomatologiya. 2014;1:20-4. [in Russian].
7. Kassebaum J, Bernabe E, Dahiya M. Global burden of untreated caries: a systematic review and metaregression. J. Dent. Res. 2015;94(5):650-8.
8. Gvetadze RSh, Timofeev DE, Butova VG, Zherebczov AYu, Andreeva SN. Czifrovy`e tekhnologii v stomatologii. Rossijskij stomatologicheskij zhurnal. 2018;5:224-8. [in Russian].
9. Zapashnik TA, Lopatin OA. Sravnenie metodov vizualizaczii dlya oczenki kachestva restavraczii. Ukrayins`kij Stomatologi`chnij Al`manakh. 2013;5:100-1. [in Russian].
10. Khalighinejad N, Aminoshariae A, Kulild JC, Williams KA, Wang J, Mickel A. The effect of the dental operating microscope on the outcome of nonsurgical root canal treatment: a retrospective case-control study. Journal of endodontics. 2017;5(43):728-32.
11. Ryge G. Klinicheskie kriterii. Klinicheskaya stomatologiya. 1998;3:40-6. [in Russian].

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 4 (158), 2020 year, 374-378 pages, index UDK 616.314-039.77-71-77:681.7

10.29254/2077-4214-2020-4-158-374-378