This document discusses the biocompatibility of dental materials. It defines biocompatibility and the factors that determine whether a material is biocompatible. The document outlines different methods for evaluating biocompatibility, both in vitro and in vivo. It also discusses adverse effects materials can cause, both local and systemic, as well as allergic responses. Specific dental materials are examined, including dental amalgam, resin composites, cast metals, ceramics and latex, noting their biocompatibility and potential adverse effects. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of considering a patient's individual medical history and risk factors when selecting dental materials.
Ahmedabad Call Girls CG Road 🔝9907093804 Short 1500 💋 Night 6000
Factors Determining Biocompatibility of Dental Materials
1.
2. DEFINITION
NECESSITY FOR BIOCOMPATIBILITY
FACTORS DETERMINING BIOCOMPATIBILITY
EVALUATION OF BIOCOMPATIBLITY
IN VITRO
ANIMAL INOCULATION
IN VIVO (HUMAN TRIALS)
MEASUREMENT OF BIOCOMPATIBILITY
ACCORDING TO FDA
ACCORDING TO IDA
3. ADVERSE EFFECTS
LOCAL
SYSTEMIC
ALLERGIC RESPONSES TO DENTAL MATERIALS
BIOCOMPATIBILITY OF VARIOUS DENTAL
MATERIALS
DENTAL AMALGAM
RESIN BASED COMPOSITE
CAST METAL
CERAMIC
LATEX
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
4. According to GPT-8, Biocompatibility is
defined as the capability of a dental material
to exist in harmony with the surrounding
biologic environment.
5. They should not undergo biodegradation.
They should not sensitize and produce allergic
reactions.
They should not be carcinogenic.
They should not contain any diffusible material.
They should not infringe the underlying soft and
hard tissues.
6.
7. Chemical nature of the components
Physical nature of the components
Types of tissues that are exposed to the
device
8. Duration of exposure
Surface characteristics of the material
The amount and nature of substances eluted
from the material
11. These are a series of
tests done outside an
organism in culture
dishes & test tubes
containing viable
tissue.
TYPES
12.
13.
14.
15. There are three regulatory classes based on
level of control, risk, necessity to provide
reasonable assurance for safety and
effectiveness.
1. CLASS I : Low risk – General controls
2. CLASS II : Moderate risk – General Controls
and Special controls
3. CLASS III :High Risk – General Controls and
Premarket Approval Application
18. Pathways of Entry of
foreign substances
from restorations:
1.OC – Oral Cavity
2.PA – Periapical
tissue
3.PD – Periodontium
4.P- Pulp tissue
19.
20. Systemic response to a dental material
depends on FOUR KEYS :
1. Concentration of substance
2. Time of exposure
3. Excretion rate of the substance
4. Site of reaction
Types of reactions:
1. Allergy
2. Inflammation
3. Toxicity
4. Mutagenicity
21. Hypersensitivity refers to an exaggerated,
abnormal systemic immune response to a
stimulus in a sensitized individual.
It is determined by PATCH TESTS with a
dental substance administered in the
cutaneous region.
24. 1. DENTAL AMALGAM
Most commonly used posterior restorative
material.
ADVERSE EFFECTS:
Contact dermatitis to metallic elements
Lichenoid lesions
Adverse pulpal response and post operative
sensitivity
Acute mercury toxicity on inhalation
25.
26.
27. 2. RESIN BASED COMPOSITE
Highly aesthetic restorative material with good
strength.
ADVERSE EFFECTS :
Contact dermatitis to METHACRYLATE
Lichenoid lesions
Estrogenicity due to Bisphenol-A
Cytotoxicity due to release of systemic free radicals
Microleakage and Nanoleakage leading to pulp
damage
28. 3. CAST METAL ALLOYS
These are most commonly used to fabricate
prosthesis and build up core due to its very
high strength.
ADVERSE EFFECTS:
Contact dermatitis to metallic elements
Lichenoid lesions
Thermal sensitivity to pulp
Systemic toxicity in case of leaching of ions
29.
30. 4.CERAMIC
Highly aesthetic material used to fabricate
prosthesis and build up core.
ADVERSE EFFECTS :
Respiratory effects from silica dust
Excessive wear of the antagonist tooth structure
Susceptible to microleakage and fracture of
veneering.
31.
32. 5.LATEX
Most common material used to fabricate
gloves and rubber dams.
ADVERSE EFFECTS:
Has been causing Allergy in 3.7% of adults and
5.7% of pediatric age groups.
Causes burning and tingling sensation
Cheilitis
Lichenoid Lesions
Inflammation of face, tongue, lips and buccal
mucosa.
33.
34. It should be obvious that the dental
practitioners must not follow a cook-book
approach but must use their best clinical
judgment for any treatment plan.
The following must be considered before any
clinical approach:
Medical history of patient
Previous treatments that the patient has been
subjected to
Hereditary allergic information
Medications that the patient has been
recommended
35. Since the biocompatibility of a material
involves ample amount of ethical issues, it
must be disposed to the most deserving
patient.
The practitioner must take utmost care to
avoid chronic exposure to any toxic
substances.