CROBM CROBM & JDR Merger
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hume, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gerzina, T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hume, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Gerzina, T. M.

Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine, Vol 7, 172-179, Copyright © 1996 by International & American Associations for Dental Research


ARTICLES

Bioavailability of components of resin-based materials which are applied to teeth

W. R. Hume and T. M. Gerzina
Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of California, San Francisco 94143-0758, USA.

Chemical components of many materials used in dental practice can move into the local biophase, where they can have beneficial or adverse effects. The strongest indirect evidence that components of resin-based materials used in dentistry can move into the biophase are the many reports of allergic dermatitis in dental personnel. Direct measurement of component release has shown that triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA), hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), and, in the case of some orthodontic cements, bis-glycidyl methacrylate and benzoyl peroxide can move into an aqueous medium from a range of resin-based materials which are applied to teeth as part of oral care. In the case of resin composite restorations, HEMA and TEGDMA are available in microgram quantities via the salivary surface in the minutes and hours after clinical placement and via dentin and pulp in the hours and days after placement. Fortunately, moderate thickness of dentin protects pulp tissue against local toxicity. There are no data which suggest that systemic toxicity is a risk with any of these materials. There are some case reports of allergic responses to the monomers in patients, but the incidence of such responses appears at present to be much lower than that in dental personnel.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 1996 Institutional Access Guidelines