Abstract
Introduction: Several failure have been related in amalgam restorations that requiring repair or replacement. Objective: The aim of this case report was to demonstrate a usual clinical condition found in dental office: fractured in amalgam restorations associated with the esthetic patient desire. Case report: Then, seven fractured amalgam restorations replacements, probably due to improper cavity design, were performed in two patients. The replacements were accomplished by three different operators. It was applied a “multi-mode” adhesive system using the selective enamel etching technique and a nanofilled resin composite with good mechanical proprieties and polishing. At the end, satisfactory esthetic results were achieved for all restorations. However, differences among operators were detected, highlighting the importance of professional training and esthetic desire. Conclusion: Thus, it was conclude that the resistance and retention form of amalgam design was the major concern on the failed amalgam restorations in this study. In addition, amalgam restorations must be replaced carefully to avoid damaging the dental remaining, and the resin composite has been selected as a preferred option for amalgam replacement, since it is more conservative and esthetic.
Highlights
A mong the most common procedures in the dental office, the restorative ones are the most accomplished [1]; they are not the most long lasting [2]
The replacement of amalgam restorations by composite resin has grown nowadays because most patients seek for aesthetics looks of natural teeth
According to Pimenta et al [2] the factors are divided into two categories: new diseases and technical failures
Summary
A mong the most common procedures in the dental office, the restorative ones are the most accomplished [1]; they are not the most long lasting [2]. The replacement of amalgam restorations by composite resin has grown nowadays because most patients seek for aesthetics looks of natural teeth. In the literature, it is found several reasons for the replacement of restorations [14]. According to Pimenta et al [2] the factors are divided into two categories: new diseases and technical failures. In technical failures have been reported: when the marginal integrity is compromised, fractured cusps adjacent to restorations; restorations’ contour inappropriate; contact points disabled; cervical excesses or defects, loss of shape or wear, loss of restoration for lacking of retention due to cavity preparation poorly executed and color change
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
