How might Operative Dentistry be a Threat to the Pulp?


  • Reshma Seeburrun




1. Roberson T. Sturdevant's art & science of operative dentistry. 4th ed. Sturdevant: Clifford M; 2002.
2. Morrant GA. Dental instrumentation and pulpal injury II - Clinical considerations. J Br Endo Soc. 1977; 10(2):55-63.
3. Stanley HR. Pulpal responses. In: Burns and Cohen S, editors. Pathways of the pulp. 3rd ed. St Louis Mosby; 1984. p. 465-489.
4. Wittrock JW, Morrant GA, Davies EH. A study of temperature changes during the removal of amalgam restoration. J Pros Dent. 1975; 13:21-35.
5. Bergenhotlz G. Evidence for bacterial causation of adverse pulpal responses in resin-based dental restorations. Crit Rev Oral Biology Med. 2000; 11: 467- 80.
6. Summitt J, editor. Fundamentals of operative dentistry – a contemporary approach. Chicago: Quintess Int.; 2001.
7. Brannström M. Communication between the oral cavity and the dental pulp associated with restorative treatment. Oper Dent. 1984; 9:57-68.
8. Fitzgerald M, Chiego DJ Jr, Heys DR. Auto- radiographic analysis of odontoblast replacement following pulp exposure in primate teeth. Arch Oral Biol. 1990; 35:707.
9. Brannström M, Linden LA, Johnson G. Movement of dentinal and pulpal fluid caused by clinical procedures. J Dent Rest. 1968; 47(5):679-82.
10. Holden GP. Some observations on the vibratory phenomena associated with high-speed air turbines and their transmission to living tissue. Br Dent J. 1962; 7113:265.
11. Frank RM. Reactions of dentine and pulp to drugs and restorative materials. J Dent Rest. 1975; 54:176. 12. Michelich V, Schuster GS, Pashley DH. Bacterial penetration of human dentine, in vitro. J Dent Rest.

1980; 59:1398.
13. Pashley DH, Michelich V, Kehl T. Dentine permeability: effects of smear layer removal. J Pros Dent. 1981; 46:521.
14. Brannström M. Dentine and pulp in restorative dentistry. London: Wolfe Medical Publications Ltd; 1982.
15. Swift EJ Jr, Perdigao J, Heymann HO. Bonding to enamel and dentine: a brief history and state of the art. Chicago: Quintess Int.; 1995; 26:95-110.
16. Davidson CL, Feilzer AL. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent. 1997; 25:435-40.
17. Pashley DH. Dynamics of the pulpo-dentine complex. Crit Rev Oral Bio Med. 1996; 7:104-33.
18. Cox CF, Keall CL, Keall HJ, Ostro E, et al. Biocompatibility of surface sealed dental materials against exposed pulps. J Pros Dent. 1987; 57:1-8.
19. Hume WR. An analysis of dentine on the pulpward release of eugenol or acids from restorative materials. J Oral Rehab. 1994; 21:469-73.
20. Hume WR, Gerzia TM. Bioavailability of components of resin based materials, which are applied to teeth. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1996; 7:172-9.
21. Ferracane JL, Condon JR. Rate of elution of leachable components from composite. Dent Mater. 1990; 6:282-7.
22. Plant CG, Jones DW. The damaging effects of restorative materials. Part I: physical and chemical properties. Br Dent J. 1976; 140:373.
23. Ulusoy M, Denli N. Intrapulpal temperature changes during the setting reactions of various dental cements. Ankara Universitesi Dis Hekimligi Fakultesi Dergisi. 1990; 17(1):19-22.
24. Pameijer CH, Stanley HR, Ecker G. Biocompatibility of a glass-ionomer luting agent, crown cementation. Am J Dent. 1991; 4:134-141.
25. Murray PE, About I, Lumley PJ, Smith AJ, et al. Human odontoblast numbers after dental injury. J Dent. 2000; 28:277-285.
26. Roahen J, Marshall FJ. The effects of periodontal ligament injection on pulpal and periodontal tissues. J Endo. 1990; 16:28.
27. Torabinejad M, Peters DL, Peckham N. Electron microscopic changes in human pulps after intraligamental injection. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path. 1993; 76:219.
28. Kim S. Ligamental injection: A physiological explanation of its efficacy. J Endo. 1986; 12: 486.
29. Plamondon T, Walton R, Graham GS, Snell G, et al. Pulp response to the combined effects of cavity preparation and periodontal ligament injection. Oper Dent. 1990; 15:86.
30. D’Souza R. Pulpal and periapical immune response to electrosurgical contact with cervical metallic
restorations in monkeys. Chicago: Quintess Int.; 1986; 17:803-808.
31. Spangberg LS, Hellden L, Robertson PB, Levy BM. Pulpal effects of electrosurgery involving based and unbased cervical amalgam restorations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path. 1982; 54:678-685.
32. Krejci RF, Reinhardt RA, Wentz FM, Hardt AB, et al. Effects of electrosurgery on dog pulps under cervical metallic restorations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path. 1982; 54:575-582.
33. Cohen SC. Human pulpal response to bleaching procedures on vital teeth. J Endo. 1979; 5(5):134-138. 34. Seale NS, McIntosh JE, Taylor AN. Pulpal reaction to bleaching of teeth in dogs. J Dent Rest. 1981; 60(5):948-953.
35. Fasanaro TS. Bleaching teeth: history, chemicals and methods used for common tooth discolorations. J Dent. 1992; 25:435-440.




How to Cite

Seeburrun, R. (2004). How might Operative Dentistry be a Threat to the Pulp?. Trinity Student Medical Journal , 5(1), Page 50–54. Retrieved from

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.