Rivera PR, Ramírez GG

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 52-57
PDF size: 73.44 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The traditional form to restore teeth previous storms with big cavity is the crowns of steel chromium and those of resin, those of steel complete the functional but not aesthetic requirements, those of resin fulfill the aesthetic one but they are not resistant. In this article intends to modify the celluloid crowns with resin that could complete the aesthetics expectations, resistance, the investigation measured the effectiveness of the restoration of the modified technique and the traditional technique clinically, one carries out a quasi experimental study in 16 children between 2.5 and 5 years, they were presented in the clinic it reforms of the specialty of estomatology of the boy’s and the adolescent of the UNAM. The selection of the sample was in an aleatory way, it divided in 2 groups according to the treatments. The exclusion approaches were: teeth without vitality in the pulp, next to fall and non restore, non cooperative children, the elimination approaches were: nonattendance to the appointments or that they present infection or necrosis pulp. The Periodontal answers were measured and in the Pulp, Fractures or losses, aesthetic satisfaction. Results were analyzed in the statistical package Epinfo 2000 using the test of square ji. They were carried out 48 crowns: 23 in a traditional way and 25 modified. Obtaining results that the traditional technique presents bigger frequency of alterations with 52%. The alteration but it frequents they were fractures (27%) and periodontal (22%). In conclusion the modified technique is better than the traditional one since has a better resistance.

REFERENCES

1. García HJ. Nuevas opciones estéticas para la reconstrucción de incisivos primarios. Separata Unitec 1999.

2. Rodríguez F, Bolsini I, Aldevia CF. The use a resin-bonded denture to replace primary incisors: case report. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999; 23: 164-66.

3. Martines E. Coronas Veneer de acero con resina fotocurable. ADM 1996; 53: 85-88.

4. Ronald GA. Función pediátrica en la identificación de caries dental. Clinicas Ped de Nort 1997: 1207-1209.

5. Raymonnd LB, Tomoyuri T, Kazuo K. Physical restraint, child abuse, informed consent: Sociolegal concerns for the nineties. J Dent Child 1994: 169-173.

6. Kotsaki A. Inherited Retarded Eruption in permanent dentition. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1997; 21: 205-211.

7. Gaton P, Esposa E, Ramon J. Restauraciones fototermocurables en dentición temporal parte II serial uvd 2001 enero cite 2001 enero 14; 1(4): 24 screens. aviable from: url :http//ww.uvd.odontopediatria/art1.htm1-

8. Noack MJ. Criteria for substituting amalgam with composite resins. Int Dent J 1991; 41: 195-205.

9. McDonald RE, Avery DR. Odontología Pediátrica y del Adolescente. México: Panamericana; 1992: 391-394.

10. Pinnkam J. Odontopediatría. México: Interamericana; 1992: 260-263.

11. Finn SB. Odontología Pediátrica. 2a Ed. México: Interamericana; 1976: 205.

12. Snawder KD. Manual de odontopediatría clínica. España: Labor; 1987: 141-149.

13. Vega La RM. Eficacia de las coronas de resina fotocurables comparadas con las coronas de acero en dientes anteriores temporales. Sistema de Estudios de Posgrado U de Costa Rica 200; 1: 18.