Friday, August 19, 2011

The Dentist's Chair: What is preferred to fill tooth decay?

In addition to the conservative nature of a composite filling, being tooth colored makes it the aesthetic favorite. These reasons likely account for why in 2010 it is estimated that 65 percent of dental restorations were composite compared with 35 percent amalgam. At this point, knowing the advantages of composite, you are likely wondering why amalgam is still around. In addition to proven longevity, amalgam is easier to place and has less sensitivity after placement than composite. Also, in back teeth under heaving forces of chewing, amalgam often wears better than composite. Since amalgam is easier to place it is usually less expensive and therefore the choice of cost-conscious patients.

You may have noticed I have not discussed the safety controversy concerning the mercury in amalgam. The American Dental Association and the World Health Organization have done extensive investigations and continue to support the use of amalgam as a safe, restorative material. Because of my personal professional experiences and my faith in these organizations, I don't think amalgam safety should be a component in the decision process.

The Dentist's Chair: What is preferred to fill tooth decay?

No comments: