A retrospective clinical, radiographic and microbiological study of periodontal conditions of teeth with and without crowns

Giollo, Marcio Dias; Valle, Patrícia Moura; Gomes, Sabrina Carvalho; Rösing, Cassiano Kuchenbecker

doi:10.1590/s1806-83242007000400012

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to direct restorations, cross‐sectional studies of indirect restorations with intracrevicular margins have been associated with increased GI, PI, PD, BoP, and CAL compared to supragingival margins 14,62–69 . However, longitudinal studies of patients, motivated, instructed on self‐performed plaque removal and periodically maintained, 70–71 did not show any detrimental periodontal outcome for restorations with intracrevicular margin design 72–79 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationships Between Tooth‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Restorations and the Periodontium

Ercoli

Tarnow

Poggio

et al. 2020

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To search the literature and to critically evaluate the findings on the periodontal outcomes of restorations and tooth‐supported fixed prostheses. Materials and Methods PubMed was searched according to a systematic methodology, previously reported, but updated to include a larger database. Filters applied were: Case reports, clinical trial, review, guideline, randomized controlled trial, meta‐analysis, systematic reviews, and English. A narrative review was then synthesized to discuss periodontal outcomes related to restorations and tooth‐supported fixed prostheses. Relevant data was organized into four sections: Direct restorations, indirect restorations, biologic width or supracrestal tissue attachment and tooth preparation/finish line design. Results While increased gingival index, bleeding on probing, probing depth and clinical attachment loss have been associated with subgingival restorations, intracrevicular margins do not cause periodontal diseases. Inflammation and bone loss occur, for both direct and indirect restorations, only with large overhangs. Different restorative materials are associated with different clinical responses when placed in the gingival sulcus or within the epithelial and connective tissue attachments. When the connective tissue attachment is removed, histological changes occur causing its apical shift and subsequent re‐establishment. Gingival displacement during impression procedures can cause gingival recession. Emergence profile can have a range of values, not associated with periodontal diseases. Periodontal response appears to be clinically not different when compared among different finish line designs. Conclusions Contemporary procedures and materials used for the placement and fabrication of tooth‐supported restorations and fixed prostheses are compatible with periodontal health when adequate patient education and motivation in self‐performed oral hygiene are present. Periodontal diagnostic criteria should be thoroughly reviewed before fixed restorative treatments are planned and executed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationships Between Tooth‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Restorations and the Periodontium

Ercoli

Tarnow

Poggio

et al. 2020

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3,4,14 Additionally, restorations with subgingival margins have demonstrated increased attachment loss. 15,16 Even if plaque is well controlled, subgingival margins present increased bleeding on probing compared with supragingival ones. 17,18,19 Subgingival margins are indicated in multiple clinical situations, including presence of existing subgingival restorations, dental caries, tooth fracture, abfraction, abrasion, chemical erosion, tooth discoloration, or to enhance retention and resistance and develop a ferrule effect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Periodontal Response to Anterior All-Ceramic Crowns with Either Chamfer or Feather-edge Subgingival Tooth Preparations: Six-Month Results and Patient Perception

Paniz¹,

Nart²,

Gobbato³

et al. 2017

Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subgingival margins are often required for biologic, mechanical, or esthetic reasons. Several investigations have demonstrated that their use is associated with adverse periodontal reactions, such as inflammation or recession. The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical study was to determine if two different subgingival margin designs influence the periodontal parameters and patient perception. Deep chamfer and feather-edge preparations were compared on 58 patients with 6 months follow-up. Statistically significant differences were present for bleeding on probing, gingival recession, and patient satisfaction. Featheredge preparation was associated with increased bleeding on probing and deep chamfer with increased recession; improved patient comfort was registered with chamfer margin design. Subgingival margins are technique sensitive, especially when feather-edge design is selected. This margin design may facilitate soft tissue stability but can expose the patient to an increased risk of gingival inflammation.

show abstract

“…17 However, studies such as that by Kokubo et al 13 observed similar plaque and gingival indexes between single-tooth prostheses-ceramic crowns-and natural teeth used as controls. It is worth pointing out that the use of more sensitive methods, like flowmetry, can reveal a more pronounced inflammatory process, as compared with clinical index analysis.…”

Section: Single-tooth Prosthesismentioning

confidence: 95%

Mouthrinse recommendation for prosthodontic patients

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different reasons can contribute to classifying dental prosthesis wearers as high-risk individuals in relation to dental biofilm accumulation. These include a past history of oral disease, age and additional retentive areas. Other common complaints include inflammation and halitosis. Moreover, prosthesis replacement and prosthetic pillar loss are generally associated with caries and periodontal disease recurrence. Therefore, the present study undertook to make a critical review of the literature, aiming at discussing the main aspects related to chemical agent prescriptions for dental prosthesis wearers. Most of the articles were selected based on relevance, methods and availability in regard to the specific subject under investigation, without considering publication year limitations. Different types of prostheses and their impact on teeth and other oral tissues were reported. It was demonstrated that there is greater biofilm buildup and increased inflammatory levels in the presence of different types of prostheses, suggesting that additional measures are required both on population-wide and individual levels in order to control these factors. Mechanical control consists of a combination of manual or electric toothbrush and toothpaste, as well as specific devices for interdental cleaning. Although many chemical agents exhibit antimicrobial benefits when used for prosthesis disinfection, only a few agents can be used safely without causing damage. Regarding the selection of antiseptics by the overall population, chlorhexidine is the most indicated in the short term and in sporadic cases. The most indicated adjuncts to overcome the deficiencies and limitations of daily mechanical biofilm control are products containing essential oils as active ingredients.

show abstract

A retrospective clinical, radiographic and microbiological study of periodontal conditions of teeth with and without crowns

Cited by 7 publications

References 14 publications

The Relationships Between Tooth‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Restorations and the Periodontium

The Relationships Between Tooth‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Restorations and the Periodontium

Clinical Periodontal Response to Anterior All-Ceramic Crowns with Either Chamfer or Feather-edge Subgingival Tooth Preparations: Six-Month Results and Patient Perception

Mouthrinse recommendation for prosthodontic patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About