• Title/Summary/Keyword: Intraoral reduction

Search Result 63, Processing Time 0.015 seconds

DOUBLE TEETH IN MAXILLARY PERMANENT INCISORS : CASE REPORTS (상악 전치부에 발생한 이중치: 증례보고)

  • Kim, Mi-Ni;Kim, Young-Jae;Kim, Jung-Wook;Jang, Ki-Taek;Kim, Chong-Chul;Hahn, Se-Hyun;Lee, Sang-Hoon
    • Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
    • /
    • v.36 no.1
    • /
    • pp.119-125
    • /
    • 2009
  • Fusion and gemination are irregularities in tooth development. It is often difficult to differentiate between gemination and fusion and it is common to refer to these anomalies as 'double teeth'. The deciduous teeth are most commonly involved, but in 0.1% of cases permanent teeth are affected, in which case aesthetic, funtional and periodontal problems can result. Double teeth present great difficulties in management and required a multidisciplinary approach. The central groove on the labial and palatal surfaces of a double tooth is extremely prone to caries, therefore early 'fissure sealing' is essential. In permanent dentition, surgical separation of fused teeth may be possible with subsequent orthodontic alignment and restorative treatment as needed to reshape the crown. Reshaping or reduction of a double tooth with a single canal may be attempted by modifying the appearance of the labial groove and the use of composite tints but is often impossible and extraction may be the only alternative. Orthodontic treatment and prosthetic replacement is then required. Implants may be an option for adolescents. The present study describes three clinical cases of double teeth in the position of the maxillary permanent incisors. The first case demonstrates an example of multidisciplinary care including surgical intraoral hemisection, root canal therapy, restorative and orthodontic treatment. The second and third cases describe the external and internal morphology of the two fused teeth by means of three dimensional dental computer tomography.

  • PDF

Comparative efficacy of 5% EMLA cream and 20% Benzocaine gel during topical anesthesia (5% EMLA cream과 20% Benzocaine gel의 도포마취 효능 비교)

  • Lee, Dae-Woo;Baik, Byeong-Ju;Kim, Jae-Gon;Yang, Yeon-Mi;So, Yu-Ryeo
    • Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
    • /
    • v.38 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-8
    • /
    • 2011
  • The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of topical 5% EMLA cream versus 20% Benzocaine gel in reducing pain from intra oral needle insertion alone as well as injection of anesthetic. The 2 topical anesthetics were tested against each other bilaterally using a randomized, controlled, single blinded, split mouth design. Phase I was conducted to find out the rapidity of onset action of the two agents on anterior/posterior vestibules and anterior/posterior palatal mucosa. Phase II was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of the two topical anaesthetic agents in reducing the pain of intraoral injections. The agents were left in anterior/posterior vestibules and anterior/posterior palatal mucosa for the amount of time recorded in phase I. Subjects recorded pain on a 100-mm modified visual analog scale(VAS). A pulse oximeter was used to recorded the preoperative and postoperative pulse rates. In phase I of the study, two topical agents showed the longer onset of action at anterior part and vestibules than posterior part and palatal mucosa. EMLA cream showed the rapidest onset of action compared to benzocaine gel except on anterior palatal mucosa. In phase II of the study, the VAS grading of the pain for anesthetic administration showed EMLA cream was significantly(P<.05) better in elimination or reducing the pain on the anterior/posterior palatal mucosa. In conclusion, EMLA cream showed the rapidest onset of action compared to benzocaine gel except on anterior palatal mucosa. EMLA cream was found to be superior to Benzocaine gel with regards to pain reduction for anesthetic administration especially on anterior and posterior palatal mucosa.

The Actual State and the Utilization for Dental Radiography in Korea (국내 치과방사선의 현황 및 이용 실태)

  • Shin, Gwi-Soon;Kim, You-Hyun;Lee, Bo-Ram;Kim, Se-Young;Lee, Gui-Won;Park, Chang-Seo;Park, Hyok;Chang, Kye-Yong
    • Journal of radiological science and technology
    • /
    • v.33 no.2
    • /
    • pp.109-120
    • /
    • 2010
  • The purpose of this study was first to analyze the utilization of dental examination through questionnaire to develop a diagnostic reference level of patient doses for dental radiography in korea. 77 dental institutions were classified into three groups: A group for the dental hospitals of the college of dentistry (11 institutions), B group for dental hospitals (30 institutions) and C group for dental clinics (36 institutions). The results were as follows : The mean numbers of unit chairs and medical staffs were 140.2, 15.3 and 5.8 sets, 112.6, 7.3 and 1.7 dentists, 3.1, 0.5 and no one radiologic technologists, and 19.7, 12.5 and 3.3 dental hygienists in A, B and C groups, respectively. The mean numbers of dental X-ray equipments were 14.64, 3.21 and 2.19 in A, B and C groups, respectively. Intraoral dental X-ray unit was used the most, the following equipments were panoramic, cephalometric, and cone-beam CT units. The most used X-ray imaging system was also digital system (above 50%) in all three groups. Insight dental film (Kodak, USA) having high sensitivity was routinely used for periapical radiography. The automatic processor was not used in many dental institutions, but the film-holding device was used in many dental institutions. The utilization rates of PACS in A, B and C groups were 90.9%, 83.3% and 16.7% respectively, and the PACS software program was used the most PiView STAR (Infinitt, Korea). The annual mean number of radiographic cases in one dental institution in 2008 for A group was 6.8 times and 21.2 times more than those for B and C groups, and periapical and panoramic radiographs were taken mostly. Tube voltage (kVp) and tube current (mA) for periapical radiography were similar in all three groups, but exposure time in C group was 12.0 times and 3.5 times longer than those in B and C groups. The amount of radiation exposure in C group, in which dental hygienists take dental radiographs, was more than those in other groups. The exposure parameters for panoramic radiography were similar in all three groups. In conclusion, the exposure parameters in dental radiography should be determined with reference level, not past experiences. Use of automatic processor and film-holding devices reduces the radiation exposure in film system. The quality assurance of dental equipments are necessary for the reduction of the patient dose and the improvement of X-ray image quality.