| Popis: |
Item does not contain fulltext After the caries lesion reaches a certain extent of tooth structure loss, a restoration is often needed to repair the defect. Operative interventions in cariology aim to aid biofilm removal and lesion arrest by cavity sealing, avoid pulpal damage, and restore form, function, and esthetics. There are no clear evidence-based parameters to determine the most appropriate treatment option for each clinical situation. Despite of this, direct composite resins have been the preferable restorative treatment. Scientific literature shows that composites and adhesive strategies play a minor role in treatment success. Patient-related risk factors (mainly those associated with lifestyle and health choices), in addition to the dentist's decision-making process, play a significant role in longevity of the restorations, which tend to fail for the same reasons that lead to the need for restoration (dental caries, tooth/restoration fracture, and esthetics). Therefore, monitoring old restorations in clinical service, even if those present clear signs of degradation, is possible and reasonable within the concept of minimal intervention in dentistry. Unnecessary reinterventions are harmful and costly to health systems, and the clinician's efforts must be directed to eliminating or reducing the etiological factors that can cause the restoration to fail. Thus, patient risk factors assessment is a crucial point in monitoring restorations. Clinician should - whenever possible - postpone operative reinterventions, monitoring the etiological factors that may compromise the restoration's longevity. Also, when operative reintervention is necessary, refurbishment, polishing, and repair should be prioritized over replacement. |
