Journal of Conservative Dentistry

: 2018  |  Volume : 21  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 349-

Heartiset greetings from the editorial team

Aditya Mitra 
 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kusum Devi Sunderlal Dugar Jain Dental College and Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Aditya Mitra
72A Bhupen Bose Avenue, Kolkata - 700 004, West Bengal

How to cite this article:
Mitra A. Heartiset greetings from the editorial team.J Conserv Dent 2018;21:349-349

How to cite this URL:
Mitra A. Heartiset greetings from the editorial team. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2018 [cited 2020 Feb 26 ];21:349-349
Available from:

Full Text

The controversy regarding the use of dental amalgam as a restorative material is continuing. The composite resin is being used most commonly as a replacement material. Cention N is yet to prove itself in all clinical situation as a long term replacement of Dental Amalgam. The high strength Glass Ionomers and the modifications are yet to achieve the required torsional and tensile strength in compound and complex restoration. Use of cast restoration including ceramic is yet to reach similar kind of popularity in general practitioners & specialists. So, we are back to composite resin.

The composite resin by all means is proved to be a non biocompatible material specially to pulp. So, the use of proper protective barrier is mandatory. The depth of a cavity and the remaining dentinal thickness is sometimes not easy to judge. We don't have the facility of CBCT in every restoration which tells us the thickness of remaining dentin at the deepest part of the cavity. The measurement of the depth of the cavity from the cavosurface margin may not give us accurate information everytime about RDT. Use of calcium hydroxide/Biodentine may stimulate formation of tertiary/reparative dentine which can cause difficulty in accessing the root canal in later years. The use of conventional glass ionomer may not stimulate the odontoblast to that extent. Accurate and long term clinical and in vivo research are required regarding the placement of thickness of pulp protective materials.

Proper guidelines of the use of different types of composite resin in different clinical scenario should be available by eminent teachers and researchers. The overwhelming trend is to use the same composite resin in all clinical scenario which should not be the case. Composite resin being used in a class I cavity should not have the similar properties as a post endodontic restorative material.

So, the need of the day is a proper classification regarding use of composite resin and strict guideline to the manufacturing and marketing companies to show the type prominently on the syringe/compule/paste and on the cover of the material.

Pronam and Praying.

Dr. Aditya Mitra