Paper 4

Read Paper 4 | Read Comments | Add Comments

Comments for Paper 4

It was very interesting to hear about studies involving saliva contamination during composite placement. Technique has always been stressed to us and really, the research finds the results to be very similar. This group passed on a lot of useful info, without telling us things that we already know...thanks!
Adena Borodkin <boro0038@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 16:10:31 (CST)

Great paper. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on post-op sensitivity with posterior composites.
Brian Barsness <bars0020@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:26:05 (CST)

Great paper! I haven't placed a posterior composite yet, but I have had to replace posterior composites with another material because of so much break-down. It will be interesting to hear what you guys have to say.
Alisa Nord <anord@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:19:05 (CST)

Great paper. I am looking foward to the lecture. Haven't done a posterior composite and am looking foward to everything in the lecture being as I have no experience at all in posterior composites.
Alyssa Hedstrom <lind0617@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:15:16 (CST)

I know that we get many conflicting views on composites and when to use them. Hopefully this helps to clear things up a little.
jason johnson <john4525@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:14:16 (CST)

Well written paper that covers the topic of composites and especially posterior composites very well. I look forward to listening to your presentation dealing with these restorations. From what I have seen clinically if these types of restorations are done incorrectly the outcome can be catastrophic.
Will Manke <mank0027@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:09:49 (CST)

It will be interesting to hear views on using composite in the posterior and see the new studies and changes backing this concept.
Heidi Nichols-Johnson <nichols_hi_d@hotmail.com>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:08:03 (CST)

Excellent paper guys. I look forward to hearing more about posterior composites.
Tom Tadysak <tady0005@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 08:04:25 (CST)

Great paper! I'm looking forward to hearing more in your presentation about placing posterior composites. I had to place one yesterday and I wish I would have had a chance to hear your presentation first.
Brian Vieregge <vieregbl@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:56:31 (CST)

Well done on your paper. It was very clearly written. Well, I definetly think that the posterior composite may be the only choicd in the future so your topic of your paper has really caught my attention.
Mike Henrickson <henr0193@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:42:28 (CST)

Posterior composites are more and more interesting and seem to be the material of choice over amalgam in many instances. I'm interested to see what research you did find on this and your personal opinions.
travis hanel <hane0044@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:34:01 (CST)

I've done an extensive composite working with Dr. Zidan. We sealed in caries becuase we didn't want to expose the pulp. This was done a month and a half ago. The patient is still asymptomatic. It will be interesting to watch him over the next couple of years . . . Looking forward to your presentation.
Peter Miskovich <misk0020@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:27:43 (CST)

A well put together paper! I am looking forward to learning more about a subject that is definitely a bit controversial right now.
Gary Hedin <hedingj@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:25:00 (CST)

I can definitely see the benefit of posterior composite resorations. Great paper, I'm looking forward to the presentation.
stephanie miner <schw0438>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:13:14 (CST)

Interesting paper about the concept of sealing over caries. I wonder does that area not removed, that is caries, eventually recalcify to a point that it is not radiographically detectable in the future? Because there is the issue that the patient will go to another dentist in the future, and that dentist may see it radiographically and treat it?
Russ Dylla <rdylla@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 07:04:57 (CST)

Composite over caries, I read about it now I am going to hear about it. Seriously though, great paper, well organized and easy to follow.
Dylan Ascheman <asch0013>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 06:57:44 (CST)

I thought this was a great paper. It was good to read about the pros and cons of posterior composites, since i have not had the chance to try one yet in clinic. Knowing a little bit more about the properties of the material, the technique, and the bonding properties will allow me to be able to better explain to a patient why they mey wish to opt for a composite for their posterior restorations.
Jim Healy <heal0052@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 06:47:31 (CST)

I am very anxious to hear your presentation, because you mentioned 2 things which are most interesting. First, you mentioned that saliva has been shown to NOT effect the bond strengh of 'Single Bond', if that is so, then why the big fus over isolation? Secondly, you mentioned the idea that bisphenol-A could slowly leak through tooth structure in the same way that amalgam/mercury does, if that is true, it could have devastating consequences for composite in the future.
Michael Nelson <nels1959@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 06:08:39 (CST)

Great paper! I'm interested in hearing your comments on composite placement over caries. I've heard a lot of opinions on this subject.
Nathan Mork <morknp@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:34:09 (CST)

This was a very well-structured and organized paper. The charts/visuals were effective and well-placed. Looking forward to your case presentation.
Polly LoCascio <loca0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:32:55 (CST)

Great job guys! It is still crazy to think that you can actually place a composite over carious dentin, and actually terminate the disease process.
Joshua Campbell <camp0385@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:04:30 (CST)

Really informative paper. My patient had a #7 Temporary crown build with Z-100 composite and it was really hard to remove. Is Z-100 more durable than the Z-250 we use?
Phillip Zhan <phzhan@yahoo.com>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 23:04:24 (CST)

I have to admit it was a little overwhelming reading about all the different manufacturers for each of the different types of composites. However, I think it is necessary for us to know this information right now and I think this paper will be a good resource as a reference for when the sales people come knocking on the door.
Ryan Francis <fran0540>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 22:58:35 (CST)

You did a great job group 4, it was interesting that you compared the different types of composites. I have only ran into z250 up in the clinic.
Jennifer LaBerge <luke0035@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 22:20:11 (CST)

Are there any studies that look at whether or not bacteria that are sealed/filled over are still living and thus able to produce an acidic environment...Are there any studies that have actually cultured the surface that was sealed over to see if any bacteria survive. One would think that the bacteria in the cavity would be able to survive for some amount of time on intracelluar and extracellular polysaccharides, or maybe they end up eating each other to survive.
Tim Osborn <osbo0075@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 22:10:37 (CST)

I found your paper very informative. It is nice to see that the very materials you found research most supporting are the same ones available for us in clinic.
Chris Wangen <wang0141@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 22:05:58 (CST)

My comment is an adjunct to Julie Smith's. I did a pulp cap in endo two weeks ago and I feel unsure of what the results are going to be. My patinet was a 20 yo male with a pin point perf from the buccal surface. I would like to know more about what factors would increase the success of the pulp cap at the time of insertion, and post op if there are any.
Brett Knutson <knut0283@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 22:03:55 (CST)

I am wondering how sealing over caries would effect post operative sensativity. You more than likely will not be able to bond effectively to carious dentin. No bond = no seal of dentinal tubules = fluid movement within the tubules = sensitivity = no good. eh????
Craig Spieker <spie0089@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:52:39 (CST)

I hope we were able to answer some of your questions about bonding to sclerotic dentin and bond strength due to contamination.
kellee kattleman <katt0013@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:50:06 (CST)

Very interesting paper. Your group did a good job of explaining a procedure (leaving carious dentin and placing composite above it) that people would have seen as crazy just a few decades ago. The paper was well organized and an easy read- much props.
Sachin Mehta <meht0026@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:44:01 (CST)

Reading this paper has improved my understanding of the use, selection, and placement technique of posterior composite restorations. Great job group 4!
Jon Matthes <matt0428@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:43:43 (CST)

WOnderful review on posterior composites/amalgam. I hope to be placing some Class I posterior composites in clinic this week. Thanks, for the info.
Matthew Berg <berg0522@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:42:48 (CST)

Holy paper, Batman! I am interested to hear more about pulp capping--we seem to be hearing mixed information up in clinic as to its efficacy. I'd also like to hear your opinions on indirect pulp capping...is it better to go to endo, or should we leave caries in hope of pulpal regression? Happy Halloween...don't laugh at my costume tomorrow!!!
Julie-ghoulie <smit1631@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 21:21:47 (CST)

Great, well-organized paper!! I always knew Dr. Combe had great information...this paper was the perfect opportunity to take it out of powerpoint and put it into context. I know this will help all of us. Nice work!
Leslie Spangler <span0072@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 20:57:58 (CST)

Excellent job group 4! I thought that your paper was very well organized and informative. I am interested in hearing more about the class 2 composite since I believe we will all be doing many of these in the future.
Kara Lobaugh <loba0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 19:44:48 (CST)

The issue of placing composite over caries is quite interesting. I'd be interested to see long term studies of such restorations.
Ryan Tietz <tiet0020@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 18:52:07 (CST)

The paper was interesting. It seems detrimental to place composties over carious dentin, but the idea of antibacterial properties of composties is fascinating.
Bradley Morrison <morr0188@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 14:29:43 (CST)

Does the shrinkage of large composite restorations decrease when you cure in increments? Is the volumetric shrinkage greater in large retorations compared to small ones?
David Gilmer <gilm0069@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 12:01:25 (CST)

I hope that the paper gave some good info about filling larger carious lesions with composite. The presentation should be good, don't miss it!
Aaron Johnson <john3097@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 11:20:10 (CST)

I thought that the paper was very well done and am looking forward to hearing more about the bactericidal properties of the bonding agents and the success of restoring over carious dentin.
Brandon Owen <owen0133@umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 10:07:36 (CST)

When all of the decay is not removed from a lesion before it is filled how is the success rate for these filled teeth? Do they have a greater tendancy to have recurrent decay or do the teeth recalcify in that area?
Stephen Moore <moor0461>
- Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 09:53:34 (CST)

Good job on the paper. There is so much info on this topic, that it must have been a bear to wade through it all. Sealing over caries is an interesting topic and I hope you guys touch on it in your presentaion.
Erick Hallie <ehallie@hotmail.com>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 15:02:42 (CST)

I thought this topic was interesting and i thought that the presentation was good to work on
Aaron D. Imdieke <imdi0012@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 13:48:48 (CST)

Great paper group #4! Very organized and informative. I did not know much about placing composites over carious dentin so I enjoyed reading about this research.
Krista Miller <mill1021@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 12:06:15 (CST)

I would like to hear more about placing a composite resin over carious dentin and how that affects the success rate.
Stephen Sawyer <sawy0071@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 09:53:59 (CST)

We really worked hard on this paper so I hope you all enjoy it.
Bryan Johnson <john2819@umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 09:29:36 (CST)

I liked how you looked at many types of composite and gave us what they are good for and some disadvantages of each. Good paper and look foward to the presentation.
Brent Deragisch <dera0008@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 09:25:27 (CST)

Excellent job summarizing all the conflicting data out there in regards to composites, espcecially in the posterior. Is there any data out there to indicate the longevity of composites if some carious dentin is left in the preparation. Does the decay truely cease or will the composite need to be replaced in the future? I have a patient in the clinic that needed a class III composite replaced due to recurrent decay and the instructor was firm about removing everything even though the remaning carious dentin was hard.
Devin Croft <crof0017@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 00:02:48 (CST)

I agree with Ben. The idea of bonding composites over caries is an issue that I would like to hear more about. Great Job!
James Sigaty <Siga0004@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 20:38:43 (CST)

Excellent paper, group 4! All of your claims were well supported with data. Bonding over caries seems to be a very controversial issue. I hope to hear more about this during your presentation.
Ben Knutzen <knutzebt@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 20:16:45 (CST)

Your group did a great job at showing the physical properties of composite and how they compared to amalgam. There is a lot of bad feelings from dentists that used composites of the past and got burned on them. The new composites seem to hold up much better and hopefully they will have an even better product by the time we get into our practices.
Brian McDonald <bmcdonal@umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 19:54:46 (CST)

As a member of this group, I have to say that there is an abundance of conflicting studies comparing the characterisitics of amalgam to composite in posterior restorations. Be certain to really assess the quality of research and rationale followed when using these papers as an informative source in the future!!
Jessica Inglis <ingl0011@umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 19:42:43 (CST)

I found the information about the addition of bactericidal chemicals, such as MDPB, to the adhesives used in the bonding process to be very interesting. It will be exciting to see what further research finds on this subject.
Ann Thiele <thie0097@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 15:57:15 (CST)

Nice work group 4. I enjoyed your paper, the organization and the depth of the issue were great. I have yet to place a compsite in clinic so every review we get is apprecaited. The diagram from in house Dr. Combe was a good addition to the paper.
Sarah Como <scomo@umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 13:00:22 (CST)

Great paper! VERY organized! I do not know much about placing composite over carious dentin, I hope you teach us more on this in you presentation! You have helped me see that composites really have improved and we will be using them more and more in posterior teeth.
Jolene Welter <welt0081@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 12:10:59 (CST)

very thurough paper, well done!
kelly reynolds <krol0068@umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 10:27:20 (CST)

Great job! I feel the same that eventually composite will replace amalgam. It is interesting to hear from your presentation about the detection of recurrent decay from composite restoration.
Lan Zhou <zhou0039@tc.umn.edu>
- Monday, October 28, 2002 at 06:02:34 (CST)

Interesting comments in the paper. I really learned from your work. Thanks.
Steven Graber <grab0054@umn.edu>
- Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 23:07:45 (CST)

Great job, group 4!!! You definitely covered all the important aspects. A definite "A", Dr. Zidan!
Roxane Huber <hube0079@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 21:31:23 (CST)

Great paper! I thought it hit some of the points not covered very closely in other lectures we have had in the past.
Jeremy Wehrman <wehr0018@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 21:09:40 (CST)

Well done! You mentioned in your paper that a fine diamond bur can be used to open dentinal tubules and enhance bonding, which is not what I usually do with a composite prep. However, I worked with two foreign exchange students from Europe last week and I was very surprised to see that they finished almost every composite prep with a diamond (and not carbide). Maybe they are on to something...
Emily Vober <vobe0003@tc.umn.edu>
- Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 17:00:15 (CST)

Great paper!! Thanks for the technique and comparison sections of the paper. I look forward to hearing more about using composite as an alternative to amalgam for posterior restorations.
Monique Wood <wood0455@umn.edu>
- Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 11:14:55 (CST)

Great Job group 4! I found it very interesting that saliva introduced during the bonding process after etching does not affect the bonding process when one-bottle adhesives are used.
Erin Gannon <gann0033@tc.umn.edu>
- Saturday, October 26, 2002 at 22:06:00 (CDT)

Great job, group 4. It was interesting to see the research that you reviewed on one bottle adhesives vs. the research that group 3 reviewed on the same topic.
Melissa McCartney <mcca0326@tc.umn.edu>
- Saturday, October 26, 2002 at 12:56:25 (CDT)

Your paper was very good and helpful to me since it seems that the majority of my patients have come in and said that they want only "white fillings." I have heard several dentists mention recently that the newer composites are just as strong as amalgam.
Thekla Olson <olso1118@tc.umn.edu>
- Saturday, October 26, 2002 at 12:43:18 (CDT)

First of all, great paper group 4. I agree with the consensus of your group that posterior composites are a viable alternative to amalgam. I notice that when I am up in clinic, many of the faculty members think that posterior composite restorations are absurd. We get quite a substantial amount of conflicting information. Woo hoo for composite.
Brent Swenson <swen0316@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 24, 2002 at 22:15:38 (CDT)

Very interesting to hear about placing composite over carious dentin. Is proper placement, i.e. - correct operator technique, the most important thing in avoiding recurrent decay? I seem to see so many failed composite restorations, ones with recurrent decay.
Patrick J Capp <capp0021@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 24, 2002 at 17:57:25 (CDT)

Super job! I am really impressed and agree that, though we must make scientifically sound decisions regarding treatment, we must also think outside of the box to better our skills and knowledge for the benefit of our patients.
Sarah (Laszcwski) Melstrom <slaszcws@tc.umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 24, 2002 at 13:44:52 (CDT)

Nice work. In your paper you mention that you feel posterior composites will eventually replace amalgams. Do you think this will be an easy task considering insurance companies' reluctance to pay for posterior composites?
Adam L. Forster <fors0174@umn.edu>
- Thursday, October 24, 2002 at 01:08:30 (CDT)

Great job on the paper. Posterior composite is a topic that I definitely think that we need to learn more about. Every dentist that I have ever observed has preferred to use amalgam in the posterior. But if amalgams are becoming a restoration of the past, I would like to learn much more about correct composite placement.
Katie Lantz <lant0025@tc.umn.edu>
- Wednesday, October 23, 2002 at 14:31:16 (CDT)

It was good to inform us on the benefits of posterior composites and hopefully some this evidence can be used to convince older dentists that composite is superior to amalgam.
Grant Raykowski <rayk0002@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 22, 2002 at 21:35:01 (CDT)

Excellent paper guys! Liked the pictures and graphs. Thought the matieral on the biocompatability of composites was well presented
Stephanie Guy <guyx0015@tc.umn.edu>
- Tuesday, October 22, 2002 at 15:36:27 (CDT)

Back to Dent 6806 Home Page