PLoS ONE (Jan 2021)

Use of auxiliary devices during retreatment of direct resin composite veneers.

  • Fabrício Daniel Finotti Guarnieri,
  • André Luiz Fraga Briso,
  • Fernanda de Souza E Silva Ramos,
  • Lara Maria Bueno Esteves,
  • Érika Mayumi Omoto,
  • Renato Herman Sundfeld,
  • Ticiane Cestari Fagundes

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252171
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 6
p. e0252171

Abstract

Read online

The removal of direct composite veneers, when the retreatment is necessary, represents a challenge to the clinician, since the healthy dental structure must be preserved. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the accuracy provided by different auxiliary devices during retreatment of direct composite veneers. Seventy-five bovine teeth were prepared for direct composite veneers, scanned (T1), and restored. Specimens were divided into 5 groups for retreatment: conventional high-speed handpiece without auxiliary device (WD); high-speed handpiece with a white LED (WL); high-speed handpiece with an UV light (UL); electric motor and multiplier 1/5 handpiece (EM); and conventional high-speed handpiece using magnifying loupe (ML). After retreatments, other scanning was performed (T2). Changes on dental wear or composite residues areas, as well as, the average between wear and presence of residues were measured. Data were submitted to Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's post-test (p≤ 0.05). There were greater areas of wear for ML, being statistically superior to WD and EM groups. The ML presented smaller residues areas, being statistically lower than the WD and EM groups. Regarding the average between wear and the presence of resin residues, additional wear occurred after re-preparation, regardless of the group. Magnifying loupe promoted greater areas of wear and smaller areas of resin residues than conventional high-speed handpiece and electric motor. Both techniques using light accessories did not differ from other ones.