The Myths and Realities of Bioactivity
December 1, 2020
Volume 16, Issue 12, December 2020
Page(s): p. 10
The Roundtable video series is a forum for discussion and debate on key topics, trends, and techniques in dentistry. For each edition, Inside Dentistry's editor-in-chief, Robert C. Margeas, DDS, and a panel of experts examine a subject to help expand your knowledge and improve your practice. This month, our panel takes a look at one of the most ubiquitous buzzwords in clinical dentistry, "bioactivity."
The conversation then turns to research. There have been independent studies on bioactive composites that demonstrate successful long-term results in terms of retention rates and the absence of secondary caries, failures, and postoperative sensitivity. Fay Goldstep, DDS, says that research very much influences her decisions when she is choosing restoratives, but it isn't the only thing that she takes into account. "I like the research, but the most important thing is the handling properties and the way the materials perform inside my practice. So, you get the clinical results from the studies, and then you form your own opinions."
The panel members agree that the bioactive restoratives that are on the market now can be just as esthetic as those marketed as "esthetic," while offering the added bonus of bioactivity. To conclude, they share what they believe is on the horizon for the future of bioactive materials.
Watch the full video on AEGIS TV at aegistv.com.
The definition of "bioactivity"
Applications for bioactive materials in dentistry
The types of bioactive materials and their differences
Thomas E. Dudney, DMD, is a diplomate of the American Board of Aesthetic Dentistry and maintains a private practice in Alabaster, Alabama.
Chad C. Duplantis, DDS, is a fellow of the Academy of General Dentistry and maintains a private practice in Fort Worth, Texas.
Fay Goldstep, DDS, is a fellow of the American College of Dentists and maintains a private practice in Markham, Ontario.
