The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 132, No 5, 667-669.
© 2001 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FEIT, D. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FEIT, D. B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Restoratives

CLINICAL DIRECTIONS

Using a removal loop to prevent aspiration of indirect restorations



DANIEL B. FEIT, D.M.D.

The possibility of a patient’s swallowing or aspirating an indirect dental restoration has been discussed in the dental literature.14 The immediate consequences of an aspirated restoration include the possibility of complete or partial airway obstruction, respiratory distress, pneumothorax or hemorrhage. Localization of the restoration usually is accomplished at a hospital via radiographs of the chest and abdomen. Rigid bronchoscopy is the method of choice for retrieval; however, should bronchoscopy fail, the patient must undergo open thoracotomy and lung resectioning.5 With all of this in mind, the dentist is wise to reduce the risk of any such untoward outcomes.

A NEW METHOD OF PREVENTING RESTORATION ASPIRATION
The standard methods of preventing aspiration are use of a throat pack, use of a rubber dam, elevation of the dental chair and placement of a ligature around multiunit fixed partial dentures.1

A removal loop will provide the clinician with the advantage of being able to attach dental ligature to the restorative unit, thus reducing the possibility of the patient’s aspirating or swallowing the restoration.

This article proposes a new method: the use of a small cast loop instead of the standard removal button on single units, which will provide a place for the secure attachment of a dental ligature.

The removal button. The removal button (sometimes called the "knock-off button") is a small projection of metal placed on the lingual or palatal aspect of a cast restoration. It conventionally is cast at the same time as the coping. Its ideal uses are the following:

– as a handle to aid the laboratory technician in the application and firing of porcelain;
– to provide a ledge or purchase point that the clinician can use for removing the restoration while performing fitting procedures;
to aid in the removal of the restoration if it has been temporarily cemented in place.

Ideally, the removal button is placed a minimum of 1 to 2 millimeters occlusal to the free gingival margin for periodontal considerations, as well as to minimize tissue interference while the restoration is being fitted into place. Most commonly, however, the restoration is returned to the clinician with the removal button already removed and the restoration ready for insertion.

The removal loop: an alternative to the button. As an alternative to the removal button, I propose the fabrication of a removal loop. Such a loop (Figure 1Go) will provide the technician and clinician with all of the advantages of the removal button, plus the added advantage of being able to attach dental ligature (Figure 2Go) to the restorative unit, thus reducing the possibility of the patient’s aspirating or swallowing the restoration. The main benefit of the ability to attach ligature is the retrieval of the restoration should it fall into the oropharynx.



View larger version (95K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Single-unit porcelain-fused-to-metal restoration with removal loop on master cast.

 


View larger version (108K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Single-unit porcelain-fused-to-metal restoration fitted in place with ligature affixed for prevention of aspiration or swallowing.

 
The advantages of adding the removal loop as opposed to the removal button are several:

– ease of use;
– provision of a point of attachment for dental ligature;
– reduced chances of the patient’s aspirating the restoration;
– a larger purchase point for removal of the restoration during fitting should it become lodged between teeth with areas of excessively heavy contact.

Fabricating the removal loop. Manufactured patterns of loops are available commercially. Many laboratories have precision or semiprecision loop attachments available. Generally, preformed wax patterns or precision attachment loops will be much too large for this application, either interfering with periodontal health or compromising the lingual/palatal esthetics of the porcelain. Therefore, their use is not recommended; rather, the clinician should request that the technician use a small piece of sprue wax.

Placement of the removal loop. It is notable that removal buttons or loops are placed on the lingual or palatal aspect; because of esthetic concerns, they are placed on the facial/buccal aspect only rarely. The only instance in which buccal placement of a removal loop may be indicated would be for a patient who has an extreme occlusal scheme and arch malformation.

Making necessary adjustments. Should the clinician decide to cement the restorative unit in place temporarily, he or she should reduce the loop to a small conventional removal button and then use it in the usual manner. The clinician must verify that neither the loop nor the button interferes with periodontal health or irritates the soft tissues of the mouth, including the tongue. The only disadvantage of using a removal loop is that it may be more time-consuming to reduce the larger amount of metal and to carry out the subsequent polishing procedures required.

CONCLUSION
This article describes the use of a removal loop, rather than the usual removal button, to reduce the possibility of a patient’s aspiration of a dental restoration. This loop aids in restoration placement and removal and is easy to fabricate.

DO YOU HAVE A TIP TO SHARE?
Do you have a time- or work-saving clinical technique to share with your colleagues? Submit it to JADA’s Clinical Directions department. A Clinical Directions item should be a maximum of two double-spaced typed pages and should include no more than one figure or illustration. Submit items to Clinical Directions, JADA, 211 E. Chicago Ave., Chicago, Ill. 60611.

FOOTNOTES

Dr. Feit is a prosthodontist in private practice at 120 County Road, Tenafly, N.J. 07670, e-mail "DZFeit{at}cs.com". Address reprint requests to Dr. Feit.

REFERENCES

  1. Fischman SL. Prevention, management and documentation of swallowed dental objects. JADA 1985;111(3):464–5.

  2. ElBadrawy HE. Aspiration of foreign bodies during dental procedures. J Can Dent Assoc 1985;51(2):145–7.[Medline]

  3. Barkmeier WW, Cooley RL, Abrams H. Prevention of swallowing or aspiration of foreign objects. JADA 1978;97(3):473–6.

  4. Schneider PE. Foreign body aspiration and ingestion during dental treatment. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1982;3(3):173–6.[Medline]

  5. Seals ML, Andry JM, Kellar PN. Pulmonary aspiration of a metal casting: report of case. JADA 1988;117(10):587–8.[Medline]





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FEIT, D. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FEIT, D. B.
Related Collections
Right arrow Restoratives


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS