Is less more? Should every endodontically treated tooth be crowned? Do all 6- to 7-mm pockets need surgery? When are veneers more appropriate than orthodontics? Is smaller always better? These questions lead us to think on a daily basis about how we are going to practice dentistry.

In this article, I would like to call attention to some of the approaches that lend themselves to a changing focus toward MID. Each case presented could have been treated in another way. However, in each case, the less invasive procedure was chosen. Consider your own approach to dental care and see if you can preserve more by invading less.

MID (OR MICRODENTISTRY) IS A MINDSET

Every patient deserves to have the most recently advocated care that results in the most predictable outcome. The outcome includes the concept of longevity. When one considers that a small filling preserves strength in a tooth, it seems obvious that a small filling would be the treatment of choice where appropriate. However, this is not always the case. To do less is more, especially if one constantly has a mindset that sees every treatment plan as an opportunity to be less invasive. As an example, every root canal that saves a tooth is less invasive and more preserving than an extraction. Every implant placed between virgin teeth is more beneficial and predictable than a bridge. Every onlay preserves tooth structure compared to a crown. Every tunnel prep preserves a marginal ridge.

Each time a patient presents with a problem, whether it be a small area of decay or an edentulous ridge, an opportunity presents to perform the least invasive procedure for a good outcome. When the focus is on using technology to treat each condition, the outcome can be further enhanced. For example, detecting decay can set a basic standard of care. For more than a century, an explorer has been used along with x-rays to find caries.

However, research has shown that an explorer often does not find decay because of the nature of decay,¹ especially with the new model indicating that cavitation takes place from the inside out.

Figure 1 is a photomicrograph of a non-cavitated groove that an explorer would not diagnose, yet the decay process is well underway. Further, because caries caused by streptococcus mutans and lactobacillus can be spread by inoculation from one tooth to another,² an explorer is no longer the instrument of choice. Enter the use of laser florescence and the Diagnodent (KaVo) to find the degree of cavitation and provide confidence of measurement, leading to treating only that decay that meets a quantifiable standard. Why wait until the cavitation process has progressed further (Figure 2)?

Figure 1. Decay not detectable by an explorer.	Figure 2. Fully cavitated lesion.

MANAGING THE PROBLEM

Once caries has been confirmed, CAMBRA (caries management by risk assessment), the new standard of care, needs to be implemented in every practice.

Before treating a tooth invasively, controlling the disease process that infected a tooth is paramount. By determining which habits, diets, and prevention methods a patient uses (or does not use) and by evaluating saliva flow and its bacterial count, a dentist can provide a plan for controlling the oral environment. For example, because caries is communicable, a family can rinse with Beta-iodine or Peridex (Zila) and reduce the quantity of S mutans and lactobacillus to a manageable level. Fluoride can be prescribed, and sealants can be applied. Xylitol chewing gum can cut lactic acid concentration by 22%.3 The total concept of prevention needs to be addressed before remedial care is rendered so the disease process will be under control.

TREATING PROBLEMS WITH TECHNOLOGY AND MID

Today, technology provides dentists with more options to provide less invasive care. Originally, microdentistry described treating small carious lesions by preparing the tooth for a composite restoration by using air abrasion4 (Figures 3 and 4). Over time, other modalities have come forth to attempt to do the same minimally invasive procedures, including ones advocating use of small “fissurotomy” burs and certain lasers. Regardless of the approach, the concept has become to prepare less, thus preserving more of the tooth. With this preservation comes the understanding that fewer teeth may break, resulting in fewer root canals, onlays, or crowns, and patients will have more predictable long-term outcomes. To dentistry’s benefit, fewer injections and less frequent drilling are predicted, thereby creating a whole generation of nonfearful adults.⁵

Figure 3. Micro-abrasion of lesions.	Figure 4. Restored minimally invaded carious lesions.

The latest concept in treating periodontal disease includes the use of a peroscope of 48x magnification to see the accumulated calculus holding the bacteria that are causing the problem. With the visibility a Dental View affords, all the offending bacterial plaque can be removed. Dr. John Kwan, a periodontist and an expert with the use of perioscopy, reports that he has eliminated the majority of the surgery he used to perform. (Personal Communication with Dr. Kwan.)

EXAMPLES OF MID

As one considers the aforementioned, it becomes apparent that for every treatment, the concept of MID can be applied. Broken teeth, especially at the gum line, need not be extracted but can be super-erupted for a feral effect, then restored (Figures 5 to 7). An anterior tooth with loss of a papilla due to a periodontal pocket can have that papilla restored without surgery, and a good result can be obtained by super-erupting the tooth. A less invasive orthodontic procedure (Invisalign) is now available for the patient who has difficulty with periodontal conditions and must floss. Every implant in a dentulous mouth saves 1 or more abutment teeth from preparation. Each onlay may preserve a large amount of tooth structure compared to a crown (Figure 8).

Figure 5. Fractured No. 10.	Figure 6. Force-erupted No. 10 prepped for a crown.
Figure 7. Final restoration of fractured No. 10.	Figure 8. Onlays (Cerec) on teeth Nos. 19 and 20.

The first procedure each dental student does for a patient is a cavity preparation. The G.V. Black model was to remove more of the tooth than the decay dictated in order to obtain resistance form and retention. Modern dentistry has made that model obsolete, and Dr. Black would, in his wisdom, be an advocate of changing his model to meet the new standard of care now possible.⁶

With technology leading the way to discovery, a Diagnodent helps find the location(s) of the decay on a tooth surface and quantify it. Is there any reason to prepare a whole central groove of a bicuspid or molar if the caries is only located in a small area of that surface? Marginal ridges of teeth have been shown to provide up to 50% of the support for cusps,⁷ so why would one want to invade that area if not necessary? When interproximal caries is found on an x-ray, tunnel preps can work well and be restored with a resin-reinforced glass ionomer (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Tunnel preps restored on No. 4 mesial and No. 5 distal.

AVOIDING A BRIDGE

Figure 10 shows 2 primary teeth the patient wanted removed because of loosening and the unpredictability of retention. The choices were a bridge (requiring reduction of 2 virgin teeth), a partial denture, or implants. In this case, in order to gain adequate space, orthodontics was used so that 2 implants could be placed (Figures 11 and 12). The outcome was truly appreciated by the patient (Figure 13).

Figure 10. Pre-op of mobile Nos. C and D.	Figure 11. Orthodontic movement for space gaining.
Figure 12. Two 3.5 implants in place.	Figure 13. Final restorations replacing primary teeth.

The concept of MID also incorporates the communication skill needed to help the patient perceive that options are available for which he or she is not knowledgeable. For example, the patient expecting to lose the rest of his or her teeth can now be informed of alternate, less invasive procedures for saving “hopeless” (in the patient’s mind) teeth, thus avoiding a poor prognosis. Figure 14 shows the teeth a patient wanted removed, which would have required a lower denture. After a period of communication, the patient, who stated she had very little money, reconsidered and accepted a far less invasive approach. Figure 15 shows the result achieved with veneers and a partial denture.

Figure 14. Severely bruxed/attrition anterior lower teeth.	Figure 15. Restored and preserved lower teeth.

MINIMAL BRIDGES

When considering the replacement of a tooth, we all know that bridges or im-plants are commonly done. However, it is often possible to save tooth structure by doing inlay-supported bridges where implants are not done. Figure 16 shows an inlay-supported bridge. An inlay-supported bridge can also be done with gold inlay. I have found these bridges to be successful and preserve considerable tooth structure. Full-coverage bridges often fail since decay occurs along the margin(s) of crowns. An inlay offers less opportunity for this, with minimal margin area along the gingival aspect.

Figure 16. Inlay supported bridge with porcelain coverage.	Figure 17. Distilization of second bicuspid for a bridge.

WHEN AN IMPLANT IS NOT POSSIBLE

When 2 molars are missing, how often is a partial denture recommended? Probably, the vast majority of the time. Then, along came implants, offering a tremendous stride forward. However, when adequate bone is not available for an implant, an option can be used to provide a distalized abutment for a bridge.

Figure 17 shows missing teeth Nos. 30 and 31. By moving the second bicuspid distally, an abutment was provided for a bridge. (This could also be accomplished using Invisalign.) Once tooth No. 29 was in position and retained for 3 months, a bridge was prepared and seated (Figure 18). (Note that Figures 17 and 18 are mirror view images.)

Figure 18. Bridge with distalized bicuspid abutment.	Figure 19. Severe decay into pulp.

ROOT CANALS NOT NEEDING CROWNS

Often, teeth needing root canal treatment are fractured, extensively restored, or already crowned. Those teeth that do not fit these descriptions may not need extensive restoration. For example, the darkened virgin tooth, diagnosed nonvital, would not need anything other than a resin restoration to fill the access hole and internal/external bleaching. Figure 19 shows extensive decay from the facial aspect in a 79-year-old man’s tooth. After a root canal was performed, a composite was used to close the minimum access hole, and a Cerec inlay was created to close the defect (Figure 20).

Figure 20. Cerec class V restoration.

REDUCING FEAR WITH MID

It is remarkable to hear of a patient’s bad experience for which he or she left a previous dentist. The research of Rankin and Harris⁸ attributes 14 concerns leading to fear of dental visits, all referring back to an attending dentist. MID can be focused on the encounter between any members of the dental team so that the dentist/patient relationship is based upon trust. Invasive care as seen by the patient is not limited to the physical only. Gale9 surveyed patients’ fears associated with dentistry and found that 2 of the most highly fear-arousing stimuli were associated with the dentist’s behavior toward patients. Kleinkneckt¹⁰ and Scott¹¹ similarly found dentists’ behavior affected patients’ feelings about seeing a dentist.

With this research in mind, it would seem that to truly practice MID, one would understand the patients’ psychological needs. Rendering care with the support patients need, through helping them feel trust and understanding, would go a long way toward the concept of least invasion.

CONCLUSION

There is now a change underway in the standard of care when treating patients’ dental needs. Dr. Ed Zinnman, a California attorney representing plaintiffs in dental malpractice cases, stated in one publication that he considered MID to be “the standard of care.”¹² Regardless of how one comes to accept MID, whether on your own or through education, the patient benefits from the concept. Every day, dentists face the options of what treatment to recommend for a given clinical condition. When those options are offered to patients with sufficient explanation, they usually prefer the least invasive procedure.

The long-term treatment outcome can also be measured vis-à-vis the extent of invasion. Less invasive procedures generally would seem to provide for a greater degree of predictability. On the other hand, it should be incumbent on each practitioner to know the expected outcome for any procedure, however invasive it may be.

References

1. al-Sehaibany F, White G, Rainey JT. The use of caries detector dye in diagnosis of occlusal carious lesions. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1996;20:293-298.

2. Loesche WJ, Svanberg ML, Pape HR. Intraoral transmission of Streptococcus mutans by a dental explorer. J Dent Res. 1979;58(8):1765-1770.

3. Twetman S, Stecksén-Blicks C. Effect of xylitol-containing chewing gums on lactic acid production in dental plaque from caries active pre-school children. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2003;1:195-199.

4. Rainey JT. Air abrasion: an emerging standard of care in conservative operative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 2002;46:185-209.

5. Hamilton J. Microdentistry: the new standard of care? Searching for consensus. CDS Review. 1999;92(5):20-55.

6. Spaeth D. Not your father’s dentistry. Dental Practice Report. 2003;July/Aug:27-34.

7. Milicich G, Rainey JT. Clinical presentations of stress distribution in teeth and the significance in operative dentistry. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent. 2000;12:695-700.

8. Rankin JA, Harris MB. Patients’ preferences for dentists’ behaviors. J Am Dent Assoc. 1985;110:323-327.

9. Gale EN, Carlsson SG, Eriksson A, et al. Effects of dentists’ behavior on patients’ attitudes. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984;109:444-446.

10. Kleinknecht RA, Klepac RK, Alexander LD. Origins and characteristics of fear of dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 1973;86:842-848.

11. Scott DS, Hirschman R, Schroder K. Historical antecedents of dental anxiety. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984;108:42-45.

12. Spaeth, D. Not your Father’s Dentistry. Dental Practice Report. 2003; July/Aug:27-34.

Dr. Whitehouse, a practicioner in Castro Valley, Calif, is currently president of the World Congress of Minimally Invasive Dentistry. He is a diplomate of the World Congress of Minimally Invasive Dentistry and a fellow of the International Congress of Oral Implantology. One of a few dentists with a master’s degree in counseling, he will be speaking at the fifth World Congress of Minimally Invasive Dentistry meeting August 11 to 14 in San Francisco. For more information on MID, visit wcmid.com. Dr. Whitehouse is available for speaking engagements on minimally invasive dentistry, communication skills, and tooth surface loss. He can be contacted via e-mail at cvdental@aol.com

Disclosure: Dr. Whitehouse is founder of the Dental Learning Center, which provides communication skill workshops and cosmetic dentistry hands-on courses.

The application of the operating microscope in clinical dentistry can be traced to Apotheker in 1981.⁹ He converted a medical operating microscope for use in endodontics. Reports by Carr, Arens, Buchanan, Kim, Ruddle, and others^10-15 led to the routine use of the microscope in the 1990s for both surgical and standard endodontic therapy. During that time, specifically designed dental operating microscopes became an accepted part of endodontic therapy. Since 1998, competency in the use of a surgical microscope is required of all postdoctoral students in endodontics who complete an accredited training program.

During the mid-1990s, a number of periodontists began to advocate the use of the surgical microscope for certain periodontal procedures. Shanelec, Belcher, and Nordland^16-22 developed new suturing techniques with ultrafine (7-0 to 10-0) sutures that relied upon the significantly enhanced vision made possible by the microscope. The microscope provided clinicians with improved precision during delicate surgical procedures and resulted in reduced postoperative discomfort. Until recently, the role of the operating microscope in general dental practice has been very limited, involving practitioners who performed a significant number of endodontic or periodontic procedures.

Figure 1. The clinician is in an ergonomically balanced operator position.

Use of the operating microscope has been shown to improve visual acuity, providing increased precision in surgical care as well as in certain other types of treatment. In addition, the operating microscope provides important ergonomic benefits. The clinician sits in a comfortable upright position, relying upon directed patient movements or movements of a mirror to visualize the surgical site (Figure 1). The balanced position of the clinician when using the microscope may help reduce musculoskeletal injuries that are common among members of the dental profession.²³

In addition to the ergonomic benefits, dentists using the operating microscope have discovered that the video camera attached to the microscope can be useful by providing both patients and the auxiliary staff with the ability to observe treatment in real time. The microscope, like intraoral cameras, allows for co-observation. In addition, this feature makes it possible for patients to observe treatment.

Mehrabian has shown that as much as 55% of the understanding that occurs in verbal communication is through visual cues, and that only 7% of the comprehension in communication comes from the words we use.²⁴ Stated differently, patients remember more of what they see than what they hear. Clinicians have found that the images from the operating microscope are a benefit in educating patients about their treatment needs. The ability to easily document a procedure using digital microphotography and microvideography with cameras attached to the operating microscope opens up new possibilities for patient education, documentation for professional presentations, and medical/legal documentation.²⁵

In addition to the ergonomic benefits and documentation provided by the operating microscope, general dentists have found that it allows for significant enhancement in the precision of restorative and prosthodontic care. Martignoni, in his textbook on prosthodontics published in 1990, was among the first to discuss how the microscope might be useful in operative dentistry.²⁶ Since that time, several clinicians have suggested that this device can be used to improve tooth preparation and the final restoration in fixed prosthodontics.^27-36

RESOLUTION OF THE HUMAN EYE AND MAGNIFICATION IN CLINICAL DENTISTRY

Carr³⁷ reported that the human eye, when unaided by magnification, has the ability to resolve or distinguish 2 discrete lines or objects separated by a space of 200 µm (0.2 mm). If the lines are closer together than 0.2 mm, the eye will see them as a single line. Magnification improves the ability of the eye to resolve these objects, and allows the clinician to see greater detail than is possible with the eye alone. For example, 2x magnifiers such as telescopic loupes improve resolution to 100 µm, and 4x loupes improve the resolution of the human eye to 50 µm, or 0.05 mm (see Table).

Figure 2. TTL (through-the-lens) and flip-up telescopic loupes.

Amsted or single-lens loupes are simple clip-on lenses that helped magnify the operating field. These single-lens systems have been replaced by multiple-lens telescopic loupes that are commonly used today (Figure 2). These magnifiers are available in either a flip-up variety or are directly mounted on the lenses of the glasses. Their magnification range is from 2x to 8x. Typically, loupes with magnification greater than 3.5x require some form of illumination from an accessory headlamp for adequate visualization of the operating field.

Figure 3. The magnification continuum.

Typically, dentists will initially use loupes with a magnification of 2.5x, and employ them for difficult procedures requiring enhanced vision such as endodontic therapy or veneer cementation. After an initial adjustment period, the dentist will begin to use the loupes for all procedures. In British Columbia the routine use of surgical telescopes by dentists has increased from approximately 20% in 1986 to 75% in 2000.^38,39 Dentists may then change to higher-powered loupes used with illumination (Figure 3).

Dentists have realized that many details that are potentially important in the provision of care are beyond the resolution of the human eye. Incipient carious lesions, tooth fractures, preparation of crown margins, and crown margin evaluation during insertion are often determined by tactile means. At magnifications above 4x to 6x, visual enhancement provided by the microscope may lessen the reliance on tactile sense. One study has shown that an experienced clinician with a sharp, new explorer can determine marginal gaps in the range of 35 to 50 µm.⁴⁰

Microscopes, in contrast to telescopic loupes, allow multiple steps of magnification between 2x to 40x. The microscope provides true stereoscopic vision through the binoculars, and the coaxial illumination from halogen, metal halide, or xenon bulbs creates shadow-free lighting.

THE ROLE OF THE OPERATING MICROSCOPE IN THE PREPARATION STAGE OF FIXED PROSTHETICS

Figure 4. Fracture of the lingual cusps of teeth requiring full coverage restoration.

The preparation phase of fixed prosthodontic care is technically demanding. Many factors determine the final design of the preparation, including the required reduction of tooth structure, detection of marginal caries, fractures, furcations, and the need for the margins of the restoration to be placed on solid tooth structure (Figure 4).

In addition, the clinician must consider the aesthetic, functional, and biologic principles regarding placement of the margins of the restoration (supragingival, gingival, or subgingival), and the type of margin best suited for the tooth (shoulder, bevel, or chamfer). While the successful provision of inlay, onlay, and crown restorations depends upon a solid understanding of the above, successful treatment is predicated on the ability of the clinician to clearly and distinctly view the operating field (Figure 5a and 5b). Leiknius and Geissberger have shown that magnification (low-magnification telescopic loupes), when used by dental students, helped reduce errors in preparation design and laboratory processing by half when compared to a control group not using magnification.⁴¹

Figures 5a and 5b. Overhang on the mesial surface of the second molar.
Figures 6a and 6b. Caries on the margin of a veneer preparation (medium and high magnification).
Figure 7. Caries on the distal margin (16x).	Figure 8. Brush cutting margins with a 12-bladed carbide finising bur.
Figure 9. Pulpal blush on maxillary central incisor crown preparation. (This tooth required endodontic therapy.)	Figure 10. Silk black cord being placed with periodontal probe. Note the clarity and visibility of margin.

The dental operating microscope can be used for the entire preparation of a tooth, but some dentists will use loupes for gross reduction of tooth structure before using the microscope to finish the preparation. Alternatively, the lower range of magnification of the microscope (2.5x to 4x) can be used for delivery of anesthesia and rubber dam placement. An entire quadrant of teeth can generally be seen at this level of magnification. Gross reduction of tooth structure is accomplished using medium magnification (6.4x to 10x), and margins are completed using 16x magnification. After finishing the margins, the preparation is examined at a lower magnification to ensure that no undercuts have been created.

Clinically, the use of higher magnification for preparation of margins appears to reduce the degree of taper of the preparations. Close attention must be given to the line of draw and parallelism when preparing multiple abutments for a fixed bridge. Otherwise, it is easy to create tooth preparations with divergent tapers, which can affect the path of insertion. The transition from low magnification (for gross tooth reduction) to high magnification (for final placement of the margin), and then back to low magnification (for the final evaluation), ensures that the clinician does not become so focused on the placement of the margin that unwanted undercuts are created.

An important benefit of higher magnification is the ideal placement of the crown or veneer margin. Finishing a margin at higher magnification can be accomplished with an electric handpiece. Finer control when finishing crown preparations is possible with an electric handpiece, where the rpm can be precisely lowered by using the dial on the front of the unit, not by a foot control as is employed with a high-speed air turbine. Or, an air turbine handpiece may be used without water spray, using a delicate “brushing” motion with a finishing bur and a gentle stream of air to avoid excessive heat generation. This brush cutting at high magnification polishes the margin, resulting in a smooth and discernable finish line.

Figure 11. Use of extreme magnification for laboratory fabrication of prosthetic restorations.	Figure 12. Explorer and premolar crown during try-in. (Crown is not seated on the palatal surface.)
Figure 13. Crown seated visually after interproximal contacts are adjusted.	Figure 14. Crown with a tight contact detected on a sandblasted surface as small shiny spot.
Figure 15. Precise adjustment of a small occlusal contact detected during try-in.	Figure 16. Gold knife removing resin cement from a veneer (16x).
Figure 17. Interproximal resin carefully removed with small metal sawblade.	Figure 18. Evaluation of the margin of a gold onlay (16x).

In contrast to high magnification, at medium magnification (6.4x to 10x power), the entire visual field is occupied by one tooth. At the higher magnification, only part of the tooth (2 to 3 surfaces) is visible at a time. The advantage of using higher magnification is the reduction of peripheral “visual noise.” At 16x magnification, 100% of the image is the operating field, and the clinician’s concentration is not affected by peripheral distractions. While the clinician is focused on the operating task, it is important that the assistant monitor the patient for signs of distress or discomfort. A video monitor connected to the microscope (Figure 1) also provides the assistant with a view of what the clinician is seeing. Therefore, properly trained auxiliary personnel are essential. If the chairside assistant is viewing the operative field with binoculars to assist the dentist, a second assistant should be in the operatory.

It is important to remember that in contrast to conventional practice, use of an operating microscope at higher magnification does not allow the clinician to see all 5 sides of the tooth at once. Therefore, a much more regimented approach to crown preparation is needed to eliminate the need for frequent changes in the position of the microscope. The tooth is prepared segmentally, from gross reduction to completion of the margin. This avoids frequent repositioning of the microscope. Often, a full crown preparation can be completed with only 2 or 3 separate viewpoints. Traditionally, when preparing a crown without magnification, the dentist will move his head frequently in order to gain visual access. Often, the patient remains stationary during this process, and the clinician must lean forward or reposition the dental chair in order to obtain the necessary view of the tooth. Over time, this unbalanced operating position can result in the dentist developing upper cervical or lower thoracic musculoskeletal problems.

When using the operating microscope efficiently for crown and bridge preparation, the instrument remains stationary, and changes in the position of the patient, the patient’s head, and the dental mirror will allow for optimal viewing. Use of higher magnification provides the clinician with a more detailed view of the margin of the preparation, but there is a corresponding decrease in the width and depth of the operating field. A good general rule is to use 10x magnification for the completion of tooth preparations.

When first using the microscope for crown and bridge procedures, the clinician will find that it takes longer to prepare teeth for crowns as compared to conventional technique. It takes time to develop the motor skills necessary to work at higher magnification. Shanelec has observed that with time, the clinician can learn to make movements in the range of 10 to 20 µm (10 to 20/1000ths of a mm).42 In addition, higher magnification will reveal rough and irregular margins, which causes the clinician to spend more time trying to finish these margins to the ideal. Once the learning curve for positioning the microscope is mastered, the actual time required for tooth preparation is equal to or less than what it was prior to using the microscope. The microscope helps the clinician see when the margin is satisfactory. There is no need to indirectly assess (with a dental explorer) whether the margin is on solid tooth structure or if caries or restorative material is on the finish line. The margin is visualized at 10x power and above.

After the final margins have been completed, another benefit of the operating microscope is improved tissue management. Whether retraction cord, a laser, or electrosurgery is used, it is easier to determine precisely whether the margin of tooth structure is visible prior to taking the impression. It is of paramount importance to be able to circumferentially view the margin prior to impressioning so a clear impression is obtained. The impression can then be viewed under the microscope and then checked at high magnification for voids, tears, or other discrepancies prior to being sent to the laboratory. The provisional restoration can be trimmed under the microscope, ensuring that the restoration is well adapted and will allow for the healing of the tissues during the provisional stage.

THE ROLE OF THE OPERATING MICROSCOPE DURING THE INSERTION STAGE OF FIXED PROSTHETICS

Once the impression reaches the laboratory, it is ideal if the laboratory uses magnification during the fabrication of the prosthesis. Many forms of high magnification are available for this purpose, allowing the work to proceed under 10x to 40x power. In 1985, Chou and Pameijer43 described how a laboratory technician can more precisely trim stone dies with the aid of a microscope. There is little doubt that laboratory quality is enhanced with the use of magnification.

During the try-in and seating appointment, the microscope is extremely useful. Historically, the prime indicator of a well-fitting crown is judged by the smooth, tactile feel of an explorer moving without interruption over the restoration-tooth interface. In combination with pre-cementation radiographs, the crown is judged for acceptability prior to cementation. There are many subjective variables when using an explorer, including the condition of the explorer tip, the angle of contact between the explorer and the tooth, the force applied, and the specific location of the tip at any point in time. The interpretation of the tactile data by clinicians will vary. A sharp explorer in the hands of a skilled, trained clinician has been shown to be approximately 5 times as effective in determining the marginal fit than the unaided eyes.⁴⁴ Visualizing the fit of the crown using 10x magnification further improves the ability to determine if the margin is acceptable (See Table).

One of the primary reasons crowns may be difficult to seat properly is tight interproximal contacts. Patients will remark that a crown feels tight and return to the office complaining of food entrapment. Interproximal contacts involving gold crowns can be sandblasted. The actual contact can then be viewed at high magnification as a shiny spot on the sandblasted surface. For porcelain crowns, waxed floss will often leave a remnant of wax at the contact, which again will be visible under high magnification and easily and specifically adjusted. The specificity of adjustments reduces the risk for an open contact after cementation.

Occlusal contacts can also be difficult to visualize when assessing gold crowns. When using the microscope, these contacts are easy to view and can be adjusted without damaging the occlusal anatomy of the crown. In addition, the use of articulating ribbon can result in the material being seen on the occlusal surface of porcelain crowns even when the occlusion is very close to ideal. Limited and appropriate adjustment of the crown ensures that the final restoration has ideal morphology.

Further, when veneers are cemented, the resin luting agent can be extremely difficult to visualize. It is ideal to remove as much of the cement as possible after tacking the resin to place with a brief polymerization cure (3 seconds). Most of the removal of excess cement should be accomplished at this time to ensure an ideal result. Should excess resin remain, it will often be difficult to see and can lead to persistent inflammation of the marginal tissues. Translucent resins are particularly difficult to see, and in most cases, the microscope facilitates removal of the excess. The cementation of full coverage restorations is also improved when using the microscope, as minute amounts of cement can often be seen and easily removed. This is true even if the excess cement is slightly subgingival.

CONCLUSION

The popularity of the operating microscope will likely increase in the future for prosthodontic procedures. Dentists will derive benefits from magnification, primarily during the preparation and insertion stages of fabricating indirect restorations^6-18. The enhanced visual acuity and illumination simplifies many technically difficult tasks. In addition, the clinician is able to practice in a balanced ergonomic position and can document the procedure with still or video photography.

References

1. Schultheiss D, Denil J. History of the microscope and development of microsurgery: a revolution for reproductive tract surgery. Andrologia. 2002;34:234-241.

2. Nylen O. The microscope in aural surgery: its first use and later development. Acta Otolaryngol. 1954;116(suppl):226.

3. Dohlman GF. Carl Olof Nylen and the birth of the otomicroscope and microsurgery. Arch Otolaryngol. 1969;90:813-817.

4. Klopper P, Muller JH, van Hattum AH. Microsurgery and Wound Healing. Amsterdam, Holland: Excerpta Medica; 1979:280.

5. Jacobsen JH, Suarez EI. Microsurgery in anastomosis of small vessels. Surg Forum. 1960;11:243-245.    

6. Harms H, Mackensen G. Ocular Surgery Under the Microscope. Chicago, Ill: Year Book Medical Publishers Inc; 1967.

7. Banowski LH. A review of optical magnification in urological surgery. In: Silber SJ, ed. Microsurgery. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1979:443-462.

8. Barraquer JI. The history of the microscope in ocular surgery. J Microsurg. 1980;1:272-275.

9. Apotheker H, Jako GJ. A microscope for use in dentistry. J Microsurg. 1981;3:7-10.

10. Carr GB. Microscopes in endodontics. J Calif Dent Assoc. 1992;20:55-61.

11. Carr GB. Common errors in periradicular surgery. Endod Rep. 1993;8:12-18.

12. Mounce RE. Surgical operating microscopes in endodontics: the paradigm shift. Gen Dent. 1995;43:346-349.

13. Feldman MJ. Microscopic surgical endodontics. N Y State Dent J. 1994;10:43-45.

14. Ruddle CJ. Endodontic perforation repair: using the surgical operating microscope. Dent Today. 1994;13:49-53.

15. Ruddle CJ. Nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. J Calif Dent Assoc. 1997;25:769-799.

16. Shanelec DA. Current trends in soft tissue grafting. J Calif Dent Assoc. 1991;19:57-60.

17. Shanelec DA. Microsurgery and gingival grafting. J Calif Dent Assoc. January 1991.

18. Tibbetts LS, Shanelec DA. Periodontal microsurgery. Dent Clin North Am. 1998;42:339-359.

19. Tibbetts LS, Shanelec DA. An overview of periodontal microsurgery. Curr Opin Periodontol. 1994;2:187-193.

20. Tibbetts LS, Shanelec DA. Current status of periodontal microsurgery. Curr Opin Periodontol. 1996;3:118-125.

21. Belcher JM. A perspective on periodontal microsurgery. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2001;21:191-196.

22. Pecora G, Andreana S. Use of dental operating microscope in endodontic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1993;75:751-758.

23. Rucker LM. Surgical magnification: posture maker or posture breaker? In: Murphy DC, ed. Ergonomics and the Dental Care Worker. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association; 1998:191-216.

24. Mehrabian A. Attitudes inferred from neutral verbal communications. J Consult Psychol. 1967;31:414-417.

25. van As GA. Digital documentation and the dental operating microscope. Oral Health. 2001;91:19-25.

26. Martignoni M, Schonenberger A. Precision Fixed Prosthodontics: Clinical and Laboratory Aspects. Chicago, Ill: Quintessence Publishing Co Inc; 1990.

27. Sheets CG, Paquette JM. Enhancing precision through magnification. Dent Today. 1998;17:44-49.

28. Sheets CG, Paquette JM. The magic of magnification. Dent Today. 1998;17:60-67.

29. Friedman MJ, Landesman HM. Microscope-assisted precision (MAP) dentistry: advancing excellence in restorative dentistry. Contemp Esthet. 1997; Vol 1: 45-50.

30. Cruci P. An operating microscope in general dental practice. Dent Pract. 1999;37:1-5. 

31. Friedman M, Mora AF, Schmidt R. Microscope-assisted precision dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999;20:723-736.

32. Mora AF. Restorative microdentistry: a new standard for the twenty-first century. Prosthet Dent Rev. 1998.

33. Piontkowski PK. The renaissance of dentistry: an introduction to the surgical microscope. Dent Today. 1998;17:82-87.

34. Paquette JM. The clinical microscope: making excellence easier. Contemp Esthet Restor Pract. October 1999:12-20.

35. van As GA. Using the surgical operating microscope in general practice. Contemp Esthet Restor Pract. 2000;4:34-40.

36. van As GA. Enhanced acuity through magnification: clinical application for increased visualization. 2001;1:40-42.

37. Carr GB. Magnification and illumination in endodontics. In: Hardin JF. Clark’s Clinic