Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Evaluation of The Clinical Performance and Effectiveness PDF
Evaluation of The Clinical Performance and Effectiveness PDF
of Adhesively-Bonded MetalGrownson
DamagedCanineTeethof WorkingPogs
Overa Two-to S2-MonthPeriod-
Summary: In this clinical study, 41 metal full crown restorations of canine teeth were
placed in 18 working dogs. Twenty-six canine teeth had severe attrition with no involve-
ment of the pulp cavities; 15 fractured canine teeth were endodontically treqted. With the
exception of one tooth, at least one-third of the coronal part of each canine tooth was
available for a supragingivally performed, minimal tooth crown preparation. A dental
resin luting cement technique was used to bond the electrolytically etched crown (made
from an alloy of cobalt-chrome-molybdenum)to the tooth. The metal crowns were slight-
ly shorter and with a more rounded tip than the original tooth. Posts or post-and-core
techniques were not used. Median follow-up period was 30 months (range 2 to 6I
months), at which tinte 36 crowns were found to be intact and functional. Five crowns
were lost; three as aresult of subsequentinjury andfracture of the toothbelow the crown;
one as a result of use of less than one-third of the coronal portion of the tooth for reten-
tion of the crown; and one as a result of an obliquefracture of the root. J Vet Dent 15(1),
13-20,1998.
IntfOduCtiOn strength of the cement is relatively unimportant (in
Direct trauma is a frequent cause of tooth fractures dogs the loads are normally in an axial direction). In
in dogs, which commonly involve the maxillary fourth human dentistry,- zinc phosphate and carboxylate
premolartoothandthecanineteeth.Thepeicentage cements have sufficient stren_gth.According to,the
-of
fractured teeth in the literature before f9gO vari6a literature, these cements are frequendy used in dogs
between 3.42o/o utd 10.7o/o.r-5In t'*vo more recent and are not very technique sensitive,4'rl-25 however
surveysofdogsanesthetizedatveterinaryhospitalsfor there have been no reports on their long-term
reasons other than dental disease.the percentaee of evaluation.
dogs with fractured teeth was 27%oisandb%o.z " In working dggs, the canine teeth are subjected to a
Dogs used for police or security work need their combination of co-mpression, shear, and tensile forces.
teethlespecial$ tfie canine teeth) to catch and hold If the resistance of tle prep_arationis less 4ran ideal, a
persoru,jrpr.y.During the trainihg activities of these high tensile_strength bf the cement will be more
-dogs
there-are many potential traumatic causes for x important. Conventional cements have a low tensile
tooth fracture, such as retrieval of stones and metal strength, wtrich diminishes their suitability for use in
objects caught in the air or an overly aggressiveattack working dogs. The resin,composite cements combine
ona training pad.a If the dog does not-tike a fi.rll bite, a high tensile strength with good compressive
but only biiei wlth its canine and incisor teettr, the strength.26 These materials have the advantage that
forces perpendicular to the long axis of these teeth can they can be combined with an adhesivetechnique.
be sufficient to cause a fracnrre] if there is a fracture of Techniques such as sand blasting, tin platirig, and
one canine tooth, the biting grip can be out of balance, electroftic etching create a retentive surface on metal
causing a fracture of the-otcluding - or contralaterai crowns. On such a surface, composite cement
-will
canine tooth.s provide micro-mechanical retention, and, in fact,
Developme.nts m3de in dental treatments during the retention can be so. high. that the . bond strength
last two decadesafford the veterinarian techniques"that su4)assesthe strength of the remaining tooth.zT Js
can be used successfirlly for restorative treatinent of achieve this, the tooth itself (enamel and dentin) aiso
fracnued teeth. Owners'of working dogs may be more has to be acid-etched to provide a retentive surface.
-than -extraction
receptive to treatrnent options odrer The purpose of this_study was to evaluate the clinical
for fi:acnrred teeth, considering the time and money performance and effectiveness of adhesively-bonded
they have invested in triining ttreir animals. metal crowns on damaged canine teeth of working
Due to "ltthe"dy
enormous biting force generated by dogs.
J.VET.DENTVoI.15No. 1 March1998 .l
3
Thble 1. Resultsof Placementof Metal Crowns in 18 Dogs
No. Name Breed Sex Age in years Indication Total crowns Treatment Date Follow.Up Months Lost crowns
ueated and radiographic evaluation was performed. anesthetized with a combination of medetomidine and
Follow-up consiste? 6f interviewing the o#ners of the ketamine (2-3 mg/kg body weight).zr
dogs by telephone at regular intervals. For dogs #1-7, Dental treatrnent Twenty-six canine teeth had
the first treatment took place in August 1990, the last extensive attrition, with no involvement of the pulp
one in fanuary 1993, and the evaluation took place cavities. The 15 remaining teeth were fractured, with
two years later (1995).28 For dogs #8-18, the first exposed pr'lF; these canine teeth were treated
treatment took place in September 1994, the last one endodontically. In all canine teeth (except for dog #9)
in September 1996, and the evaluation was completed at least one-third of the coron.l p"rt of the tooth was
in September of 1997. still present. The crown preparation was performed
supragingivally. In this study, crown lengthening by
Procedures osteoplasty to add length available for retention was not
The dogs were sedatedwith medetomidine(1000 necessary.Gingivoplasty was performed ifnecessary. No
mcg IM per square meter of body surface) or posts, pins, or post-and-core techniques were applied.
Figure lC. Application of acid etchant. Figure lD. The etched enamel appears challcy
white.
Figure 4.{'. Metal crown on a mandibular canine Figure 48. 28 months following cementation.
tooth of dog #12, immediately following cementa-
tron. c. Panavia Ex@,Kuraray, lapan.
Figure 6C. Ten months later, the crov/n is still Figure 6D. The opposite side, immediately fol-
present as a sflrmp. lowing cementation. This crown was still in place
30 months later. The fractured maxillary canine
tooth was treated endodontically, with a compos-
ite restoration.
II. Bieniek I(M, Kilpper H, Bieniek H: Metallkeramische kronen 38. Pollok S, Diaz l: Restoration of a broken canine tooth. Vet Med.
zur prothetischen behandlune des hundecaninus. Der Prahtische Snall Aniw Cl,in 27 -30, 19 68.
Tier-arzt 68(5); 85 -87, 1987 . - 39. Reichart P. Apelt K: Technik de iiberkronunsen im
12. Bieniek HL Bieniek I(\M: Prothetik. ln: Zolmbeilhund.e.ft.ir d.ie kleintiergebiss. TierAinl-Praxis 5: 481-486, 1970.
Kleintierproxis. Stuttgart: E*e, L29 -147, 1993. 40. Wiest LM, Sweeney EAI: Restoration of a fractured canine toottr
13. Bufteereit M: Fallbencht: einise moslichkeiten konservativer in a dog. f An Wt Me7 Asroc164(6);601-602, 1974.
zahnbehiirdluns biem hund aus deisicht"des orakfikers. Kleintier- 41. W1'r-rneWPD, Tremaine LM, Matthews JR Restoration of a
Praxis 36:31-34- 1991. fractured tooth in a dog. f Am Wt Med ,Assor162(2);396-397,
14. Ciapparelli L, Penman S: Restorative dentistry. In: Harvey CE, t973.
Orr HS, eds. Mnnaal of Snall Aniwal Den ntry. BSAVA I'ubl, 85- 42. Wilhelrn RS, Salisbury RM, Emswiller RM: Dental prosthesis
99, 1990. used to crown a canine rcnrh. Vet Med. SmallAnin Clin72'-299-
15. Eisenmenger E, T,etner K: Crown and tooth restoration. In: t978.
Wterinary Dentiwy. Philadelphia: ka & Febiger, ll3-123, 1985. 43. Rivers G: Protective crown for an enamel lesion in a workinq
16. Fahrenkrus P: Prothetik. In Hand.bwch d.erZahnbehnnd.lunz in pofice dog. ProcYetDent, 135, 1995.
d.erKleintierpiaris. Aulendorf: Albrecht , 57-58, 1988. 44. Klein H: Vereleich verschiedener iiberkronunsstechniken am
17. Fahrenkrug P: Crowns in veterinary dentistry: indication, kiiLnsdich frakturie-nen caninus des hundes. Hannjver: Vet Diss ,
preparation, proceedings. Prac. BSAVAand ProcYet Dent, 1989. 1979.
18. Gammon RL: Crowns and restorations. Vet Foeus2(l); I3-I7, 45. Golden AL, Stoller N. Harvev CE: A survey of oral and denal
r990. diseases in dogs anesthetized at a veterinary h<jspital. J Am Anim
Hosp Assocf 8;-89f-899, 1982.
19. Hamilton Cf, Ridgway RL: Dowel and core preparation, and firll
gold coverage of maxil.lary canine teeth in a German shepherd. Vaa 40 Lryqdi R|: Approach lor measuring crown length. Proc Yet
Med Small Anim Clin 7l; 176-18l , 1976. Dent addendum- 1990.
20. Harvey CE, Emily PP: Restorative dentistry. In: Swall Animal 47. lrt\tlligan TW: Custom crown restorations and crown
Dentistry. St. louis: Mosby, 213-265, 1993. lengthening procedures. ProcYet Dent, 93-96, 1993.
2I. Holmstrom SE, Frost I Gammon RL: Crown therapy. In: 48. Holmstrom SE, Gammon RL: FuIl crovryr restorations. J Vet
Veterinary Dental Tbchniaues for tbe Srnoll Aniwal Practitioner. D ent6(l );8, 1989.
Philadelphia: WB Saunderd, 308-338, 1992. 49. Williams CA: The use of cast crowns for tooth restoradon in
22. J'trava E, Krepelka V, Fagos Z: l.lber die behandlung von dogs. Proc Vet Dent, 63-66, L990; and, Proc WSAVA, 380-381,
frakturierten zdhnen beim hunden. Berl Mdinch Tierorzld. L99T.
Woehenschr 12 ; 235 -237, 19 66. 50. Williams VD: Bond venus rebond strengths of the luting agents
23. Kaplan B, Man SG: Restoration of the maxillary canine teeth of for resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. J rtosth Dent 67; 2Eg:292,
a dog with enamel and dentin hlpoplasia. J Arn Wt Med Assoc t992.
1 5 0 ( 6 ) ; 6 0 3 - 6 0 7 , 1 96 7. 5l . Tian AHL: Marsinal leakaee of cast sold crowns luted with an
24. Klein H: Metaleusskronen mit zentralen wurzelstift zur adhesiveresin cemen-r.I Prostb'Dent67l It-tS. t992.
prothetischen ven orging frakrurierten cannt. Kleintier-Praxis 25; 52. Inokoshi S, Shimada I Fujitani M, et al: Monkey pr:lpal
r97-200,1980. response to adhesive luted indirect resin composite inlays. Oper
25. Znmer K: Restorative dentistry. Proc AAIIA Annual Meeting, D ent 20; l fl -I18, f995.
4I-42. 1990. 53. Pameijer CH: Pulp reacdons to resin cements. Arn J Dent 5(2);
26. White SN, Zhaokun Y: Compressive and diametral tensile 8L-87. 1992.
strengths of current adhesive luting igents. J Proah Dent 69; 568-
572, t993. 54. Kripper H, Bienek KW: Die transdentale fxation bei der
konenversorgung von hundegebissen. Praht Tierorztl 9; 28-33,
27. Gorodolsky S, Zidan O: Retentive strength, disintegration, and 1987.
marginal quality of luting cemens- J Prosth Dent 681' 269-274,
L992. 55. Fahrenkrug P: Permanent crown fixation in working dogs. Proe
Finr World De-ntal ConerressAVDS. 30-34. 1990.
28. van Foreest AW, Roeters l: Adhesively bonded crowns on
fractured canines in working dogs; technique and clinical evaluation. 56. Fahrenkrue P' iestauration frakturierten canini beim
ProcYet Dent. 624-664. 1995. diensthund mit {uerverbolzten stahlkronen. Video-vet. Spiegel 37;
5-6, 1990. made^
29. Sap \ Hellebrekers Ll, van Foreest AW, et al:, Het gebruik van
de combinatie medetomidinefetamine bii de hond voor anesthesie
bij tandheelkundige ingrepen: Een evaluatie van een klinische
Author Information
toepassing. Tijd.vhr Di.ngeneeshd.122; 3O9-312, 1997.
From the Dental Refenal Service at the Veteinary
30. Visser C]: Accurate crown impression two-step, putty wash
technique using polyvinyl siloxane impression material. Proc Yet
Specialist Centrum " de Wagenrenk,"KeijenbergsewegI 8,
Dent, I33, 1994. NL 6705 BN Wageningen,The Netherlands (van Foreest)
and the Departrnent of Cartobgy and Endodontology,
31. Coles S: Management of fractured teeth. Proc.YetDent,24-17,
1994. University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands (Roeters).
32. Shioo AD. Fahrenkrue P: Prosthodontics. In: Proctitioner\
'ti
Gaid.e Veterinary Dintisty Beverly Hills: Dr. Shipp's
Laboratories, 9 5- 116, 1992.
33. Bieniek HJ, Bieniek I(\M, Kurz UH: Kunststoffaufbau des
frakturierten caninus beim hund mit hilfe der tietziehfolienform.
Kleintier-Praxis 28; 342-344, 1983.
34. Charnok M, Usher F|: Fitting a prosthetic crown to a canine
toodr in a police dog. Va Ree83;464-465, 1968.
35. Dorn'AS: Crorin restoration of canine teeth with composite