Newsletter
The use of mercury in dental restorative materials has a long history. While amalgam fillings are still popular among dentists in both developed and developing countries, the toxic effects of the metal remain a subject of controversy.
was written by:
In my practice, I stopped performing tooth restorations with amalgam 15 years ago, not because of its toxicity, but because it is not a naturo-mimetic and such restorations require more invasive tooth preparation. Now, we have various tooth-coloured adhesive restorative materials at our disposal as an alternative to amalgam. Therefore, its use in clinical practice largely depends on the mindset and choice of the dentist and patient. I personally believe that, if a dentist considers do no harm dentistry his or her practice philosophy and adopts minimally invasive restorative techniques to achieve naturo-mimetic clinical results, then silver amalgam restorations no longer have a place in clinical dentistry.
When discussing banning mercury-containing restorative materials in dentistry, we must consider what we have been teaching our students at undergraduate level. If we carefully look at the restorative dentistry syllabus in Asia, we see that almost every dental department still teaches conventional restorative procedures with amalgam. They also focus on G.V. Black’s principles of cavity preparation, which are now considered very invasive and becoming increasingly obsolete in quality dental practice. Unless we reconsider restorative techniques and materials science in dental curriculums, it will be difficult to induce practical changes in clinical practice.
As a practitioner and advocator of minimally invasive cosmetic dentistry, I have been effectively promoting tooth-coloured adhesive restorative materials. I strongly urge young dentists to perform minimally invasive and naturo-mimetic dentistry for the long-term health and beauty of teeth and smiles.
From http://www.dental-tribune.com
Dr. Sushil Koirala