I want to avoid traditional drilling so as to save myself from unbearable discomfort and further to preserve as much tooth matter as possible.
If ultrasonic scaling can remove composite without taking away dentin I don't see why drilling is necessary. Increased retention, or a deepened hole resulting from drilling, is exactly what I do not want. Events could proceed this way:
1. The dentist removes the shallow resin composite with ultrasonic scaling.
2. The tooth is now clear of all old resin composite. No additional tooth structure has been lost.
3. The dentist primers the bare biting surface of the tooth and applies the new resin composite. He shines his blue light. Done.
There is no additional drilling into the tooth whatsoever. While this results in decreased retention, it also spares as much dentin as possible, and that is my main aim. I prefer actual preservation of tooth over the possibility of a decreased lifespan for the new composite. Is this understandable?
A surgical ultrasonic unit might be too powerful, as I don't want to risk any accidental removal of tooth tissue. Is it conceivable that a standard cleaning unit could achieve the desired end?
My research suggests it might work:
This study investigated the effects of sonic and ultrasonic scaling on the surface roughness of five commonly used tooth-colored restorative materials for Class V cavities, including a flowable resin composite (Tetric Flow), a compomer (Compoglass F), a glass ionomer (Fuji II), a resin-modified...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
-this study discussed composite wear resulting form scaling
And here is a passage from another report:
"In addition to root surfaces, restorative materials adjacent to areas instrumented with power-driven scalers may sustain chips, scratches, or loss of material. For example, porcelain and composite restorations can be significantly damaged by ultrasonic or sonic instrumentation."
Here are some other applicable excerpts from the same study. I'm sure none of this is new to you but I just would to have the information posted for reasons of discussion:
"There are 2 types of power-driven scalers: sonic and ultrasonic. Sonic scalers are air-turbine units that operate at low frequencies ranging between 3,000 and 8,000 cycles per second (Cps), with a vibratory-type tip movement that is primarily linear or elliptical in direction."
"Ultra-sonics are currently available in 2 basic types, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric, which differ in their mechanisms of action. Magnetostrictive instruments operate between 18,000 and 45,000 Cps, using flat metal strips in a stack or a metal rod attached to a scaling tip."
"A piezoelectric unit operates in the 25,000 to 50,000 Cps range and is activated by dimensional changes in crystals housed within the handpiece as electricity is passed over the surface of the crystals."
So the sonic and ultrasonic cleaners range in strength from 3,000 cps to 50,000.
This part here concerns the root, lower tooth structure, but might as well apply to general scaling:
"There are some data to suggest that one way to avoid creating extensive iatrogenic root surface damage during periodontal debridement is to perform the minimal number of multiple light overlapping strokes with an ultrasonic scaler that are necessary to achieve a clean root."
"Using the ultrasonic scaler on medium or low power or using the tip of the sonic scaler at an angle close to zero degrees to the tooth surface may enable the clinician to perform a thorough debridement without excessive damage to root surfaces."
Would this technique work with removing composite? Multiple light strokes?
Also notable:
"Sonics and ultrasonics can be useful for the removal of amalgam overhangs."
Thanks again,
John