The safety and biocompatibility of direct aesthetic restorative materials.
Journal
British dental journal
ISSN: 1476-5373
Titre abrégé: Br Dent J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7513219
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2022
05 2022
Historique:
received:
23
12
2021
accepted:
11
03
2022
entrez:
13
5
2022
pubmed:
14
5
2022
medline:
18
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Restorative dental materials are among the most important medical devices in terms of the numbers of patients who benefit and the technical sophistication of the products. Many though contain toxic or noxious substances, including potentially sensitising resin monomers, photoinitiators, acidic polymers and glass or ceramic filler particles. Despite this, dental materials are among the safest medical devices in use today, with very few reports of adverse reactions or injuries among both patients or the dental team. This paper considers the potential for adverse reactions to dental materials, current evidence for harm and finally examines the reasons why in real-world clinical use the likelihood of an adverse event is extremely low. Medical devices regulations, responsible manufacture and clinical vigilance all appear to play important roles in ensuring that dental materials do not cause or present a risk to patients. While this excellent in-practice safety record is welcome, there is now increasing interest in the 'macro' scale biocompatibility of dental materials and their packaging in the environment, subjects that have been relatively neglected until recently. It was concluded that this should be a priority for future research and development and support is needed from governments alongside the manufacturing industry and the profession.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35562452
doi: 10.1038/s41415-022-4198-6
pii: 10.1038/s41415-022-4198-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Composite Resins
0
Dental Materials
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
611-614Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the British Dental Association.
Références
Riva Y R, Rahman S F. Dental composite resin: A review. AIP Conf Proceed 2019; DOI: 10.1063/1.5139331.
Nicholson J W. Chemistry of glass-ionomer cements: a review. Biomaterials 1998; 19: 485-494.
Nicholson J W, Czarnecka B. The biocompatibility of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements for dentistry. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1702-1708.
Ruse N D. What is a "compomer"? J Can Dent Assoc 1999; 65: 500-504.
Van Noort R. Introduction to Dental Materials. Missouri: Mosby, 2013.
Brown D, Sherriff M. Twenty years of mercury monitoring in dental surgeries. Br Dent J 2002; 192: 437-441.
Tillberg A, Stenberg B, Berglund A. Reactions to resin-based dental materials in patients -type, time to onset, duration, and consequence of the reaction. Contact Dermatitis 2009; 61: 313-319.
Reusche E, Pilz P, Oberascher G et al. Subacute fatal aluminium encephalopathy after reconstructive otoneurosurgery: a case report. Hum Pathol 2001; 32: 1136-1140.
Harrison L, Kumar S, Bull M, Hatton P V, Bottrill I, Aldren C. Clinical case series describes a contraindication for SerenoCem Granules™ in mastoid obliteration: Our experience in sixty-four patients. Clin Otolaryngol 2017; 42: 1095-1100.
Hatton P V, Hurrell-Gillingham K, Brook I M. Biocompatibility of glass-ionomer bone cements. J Dent 2006; 34: 598-601.
Buchanan G D, Tredoux S, Gamieldien M Y. Allergic contact dermatitis from resin-modified glass ionomers. J Conserv Dent 2019; 22: 310-312.
Scott A, Gawkrodger D J, Yeoman C et al. Adverse reactions to protective gloves used in the dental profession: experience of the UK Adverse Reaction Reporting Project. Br Dent J 2003; 195: 686-690.
Scott A, Egner W, Gawkrodger D J et al. The national survey of adverse reactions to dental materials in the UK: a preliminary study by the UK Adverse Reactions Reporting Project. Br Dent J 2004; 196: 471-477.
Tillberg A, Stenberg B, Berglund A. Reactions to resin-based dental materials in patients - type, time to onset, duration, and consequence of the reaction. Contact Dermatitis 2009; 61: 313-319.
Aalto-Korte K, Alanko K, Kuuliala O, Jolanki R. Methacrylate and acrylate allergy in dental personnel. Contact Dermatitis 2007; 57: 324-330.
Yamashiro K, Miki H, Kitagawa M, Oka H, Arias Z, Takashiba S. Allergic Reaction to Zirconia Ceramic Bridge Cementation Using a Dental Adhesive Resin Cement: a Case Report. SN Compr Clin Med 2021; 3: 327-330.
Sananez A, Sanchez A, Davis L, Vento Y, Rueggeberg F. Allergic reaction from dental bonding material through nitrile gloves: Clinical case study and glove permeability testing. J Esthet Restor Dent 2020; 32: 371-379.
Johns D A, Haemaraj S, Varoli R K. Allergic contact stomatitis from bisphenol -a -glycidyl dimethacrylate during application of composite restorations: a case report. Indian J Dent Res 2004; 25: 266-268.