Recently, Garrison Dental has introduced a new sectional matrix retainer, the Composi-Tight® Silver Plus (TM) . Garrison claims that, "The combination of new G-Rings and the matrix band selection available in the new Composi-Tight Silver Plus Kit will provide clinicians tight; predictable contacts on posterior Class II composites with minimum effort."

Furthermore, the company explains that, " Major advancements in the manufacturing techniques of the new G-Ring® have resulted in a ring with nearly twice the amount of tooth separating force as Garrison"s original G-Ring while preventing ring deformation from repeated use. Color-coding of the rings allows instant identification for selecting either the standard G-Ring or the long-tined G-Ring. The tips of the G-Rings are the smallest available allowing for easier placement and less flash. They retain Garrison"s patented burnished tip that prevents accidental ring spring-off. The matrix band selection for Composi-Tight Silver Plus is made up of the most popular sizes from both their Original and Gold kits. "

We would note, however, that there are several of these type of sectional matrix retainers already on the market, including BiTine, Palodent and TriClip to name just a few. There are also a number of contact tightening gadgets to help with posterior composites. What are the pros and cons of these devices and what are your experiences? Does the new Composi-Tight® Silver Plus (TM) really offer a new level of form and function to your posterior composites?

Posted by DDSGadget at 10:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In this first installment of DDSGadget.com's and Conebeam.com's complex dental case discussions, we cover the case of a patient with bilaterally impacted canines. We encourage you to provide your own opinions on this case, including any different decisions you may have made.

Case History:
The patient has bilaterally impacted canines. It was difficult to assess the precise position of the impacted teeth vis-a-vis the other teeth and thus the likelihood of success of trying to move it into position. The orthodontist ordered a cone-beam CT.

Photo Description:

The panoramic & 3D reconstructions seen below, shows both impacted teeth, #'s 6 & 11. The cross-sections below show #11 to be lying above the other developing teeth, with its long axis directed bucco-lingually, and its crown pointing towards the buccal.

Clinical Decisions:

The orthodontists decided in this case to extract the impacted cuspids.

What is your opinion on this case? Would you have done the same thing or perhaps done something different? Please leave your thoughts below.

Photos:

Credits:

Scan: Harvard School of Dental Medicine (http://www.hsdm.harvard.edu/asp-html/)

3D Reconstructions: 3D Diagnostix Inc. 

Images Courtesy of:  www.Conebeam.com  

Posted by DDSGadget at 02:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

There are a number of pricey gadgets on the market, including the Easy X-TRAC® System pictured here, for atraumatically extracting teeth which claim to offer advantages over traditional or periotome extractions.

The goal is to destroy or remove as little bone as possible to preserve the extraction site for a dental implant. These newer dental instruments utilize sort of a cork-screw mechanism to pull the tooth out of the socket, leaving much of the cortical plates intact.

For example the sales material for Easy X-Trac claims: "The Easy X-TRAC® technique allows you to execute an absolute atraumatic extraction with no rotary movements, zero bone loss, and no post-traumatic swelling. It also gives you the ability to perform an efficient extraction that minimizes patient discomfort and provides you the opportunity to successfully place immediate implants."

Has anybody used any of these new gadgets or techniques? Do they really work that much better that traditional or periotome extractions?

Posted by DDSGadget at 12:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)