Non-Metallic Biomaterials for Tooth Repair and Replacement : a volume in woodhead publishing series in biomaterials / P. Vallitu

Recurso electrónico disponible desde la Biblioteca Electrónica de Mincyt.

Front matter, Copyright, Contributor contact details, Woodhead Publishing Series in Biomaterials, Foreword. Part I: Structure, modification and repair of dental tissues. 1 - Structure and properties of enamel and dentin. 2 - Biomineralization and biomimicry of tooth enamel. 3 - Enamel and dentin bonding for adhesive restorations. 4 - Enamel matrix proteins (EMP) for periodontal regeneration. Part II: Dental ceramics and glasses for tooth repair and replacement. 5 - Processing and bonding of dental ceramics. 6 - Wear properties of dental ceramics. 7 - Sol-gel derived bioactive glass ceramics for dental applications. Part III: Dental composites for tooth repair and replacement. 8 - Composite adhesive restorative materials for dental applications. 9 - Antibacterial composite restorative materials for dental applications. 10 - Effects of particulate filler systems on the properties and performance of dental polymer composites. 11 - Composite-based oral implants. 12 - Fibre-reinforced composites (FRCs) as dental materials. 13 - Luting cements for dental applications. Index.

The task of providing a reliable replacement for anatomic loss falls short of the original biology in both elegance and durability. Although prosthetic replacements are poor substitutes for healthy biology, disease and destruction leave clinicians few alternatives. Teeth and their prosthetic replacement typify this dilemma. The healthy tooth is a thing to be admired – strong, compliant, chemically resistant, and even beautiful. Despite the best efforts of clinicians and technicians, dental restorations have a long history characterized by failure, non-vitality, and a lack of true satisfaction. In the last 100 years, however, there has been success and beauty. These successes have provided important principles and the foundation from which current researchers and clinicians strive to improve the science of anatomic replacement.

Perhaps the greatest shift in restorative treatment ideology is the concept of minimal invasiveness. When preventative and regenerative therapies exist, they should be recommended and encouraged. The protection and regeneration of biological structures should be the goal of every clinician and researcher. Where resection and prosthetic reconstruction are the only possibility, however, the modern clinician should ask, what may remain? To this question, the modern answer emerges: retain all but the diseased state. Comparing the native biological structure with any restoration should affirm that answer, as should the relative lifespan of most restorations.