See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335609525

Intraoral Air Abrasion: A Review of Devices, Materials, Evidence, and Clinical

Applications in Restorative Dentistry

Article · September 2019

CITATIONS READS

2 262

3 authors, including:

Celin Arce
University of Alabama at Birmingham
8 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Celin Arce on 27 July 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 CONTINUING EDUCATION 2
AIR ABRASION

| ALPHA OM EGA |

Intraoral Air Abrasion: A Review of

Devices, Materials, Evidence, and Clinical
Applications in Restorative Dentistry
Chan-Te Huang, DDS; Jihyon Kim, DDS; Celin Arce, DDS, MS; and Nathaniel C. Lawson, DMD, PhD

L E A R N IN G O B J E C T IV E S

Abstract: Intraoral air abrasion is a technique in which abrasive particles are used Identify the armamen­
tarium for intraoral air
to remove or alter tooth structure. Intraoral air-abrasion devices are available as
abrasion
standalone units that offer a variety of customization, such as modifications to Discuss the effect of air
air pressure, particle flow rate, and water flow rate, or as attachments to a dental abrading tooth structure
on the tooth's surface tex­
unit, allowing for a smaller footprint in the operatory. Some devices used for ture and bond strength
intraoral air abrasion are able to limit excess particle spray through utilization Describe clinical applica­
of a shroud of water. Aluminum oxide, or alumina, is the most commonly used tions and protocols for
intraoral air abrasion
and most abrasive type of air-abrasion medium; it is used mostly to roughen or
remove tooth structure. Other types of particles are intended for cleaning tooth
DISCLOSURE: Dr. Lawson has previously
surfaces. Previous research has reported negative and positive effects, as well received grant support from Danville
Materials/Zest Dental Solutions, which
as no effect, of air abrasion on the bond to dentin and enamel. The results of provided product support for this
article. The authors had no other
a study performed for this review show that air abrasion to both dentin and disclosures to report.

enamel with alumina at 60-psi pressure produced a visible roughening texture but did not negatively affect
bond strength. Clinical applications for intraoral air abrasion in restorative dentistry include cavity preparation,
cleaning of preparations, and removal of plaque and stain prior to restoring a tooth.

irborne-particle abrasion is defined in the glossary restorative procedures, and present clinical protocols for employing

A
of prosthodontic terms as “the process of altering the intraoral air abrasion. Intraoral air abrasion may also be used as a
surface of a material through the use of abrasive parti­ tool for dental prophylaxis, often called air polishing; however, this
cles propelled by com pressed air or other gasses.”1 review will focus on its uses as an adjunct for restorative procedures.
More casually, this process is known as air abrasion or
sandblasting'. Most dental laboratories have air-abrasionAir-Abrasion
units that Devices
are used to remove investment material, clean out milling residue, Several com mercially available intraoral air-abrasion units can
roughen the intaglio of crowns, and perform various other procedures be used w ithout sim ultaneous w ater spray. Examples include the
associated with laboratory work. The use of intraoral air abrasion MicroEtcher™ IIA (Danville M aterials/Zest Dental Solutions, zest-
has become practical with devices that simultaneously output abra­ dent.com) and the EtchM aster' (Groman Dental, gromandental.
sive particles and water to control the spread of the particles. Several com). These system s are effective for roughening and cleaning,
different types of abrasive particles maybe used depending on the clin­ although the particle spray tends to be messy for both the patient
ical application for which the intraoral air abrasion is being performed. and the dental operator. If a dental practice is going to make the use
This article will describe the armamentarium available for intraoral of intraoral air abrasion a routine part of restorative procedures,
air abrasion, review the evidence for the use of this modality prior to the addition of w ater spray becomes essential.

508 COMPENDIUM September 2019 Volume 40, Number 8

 Among the intraoral air-abrasion units with water (eg, PrepStart™
H20, Danville Materials/Zest Dental Solutions; AquaCare, Velopex,
velopex.com; RONDOflex™ plus 360, KaVo Kerr, kavo.com; Bioclear
Blaster, Bioclear, biocleardental.com), there are differences in the
mechanics of the devices that can affect their efficiency in cutting
and roughening, such as the mechanism used to mix abrasive parti­
cles and air, the air pressure, particle flow rate, and w ater shroud­
ing flow rate. For example, some devices mix particles and air by
creating a vortex within the particle chamber, whereas others use a
vibration mechanism.2Another differentiation is thatsom e intraoral
air-abrasion systems are available as standalone devices and others
are connected to a dental unit.
After a search of the literature, the authors found no research
comparing the effectiveness of air-abrasion particles with and with­
out the use of water. To reiterate, the purpose of the w ater is to
control the spray of the particles.
Standalone Devices
The advantage of a standalone device is that it usually offers more versa­
tility in its functions, such as the ability to adjust the air pressure, particle
flow rate, and water shrouding flow rate. Two widely used models, the
PrepStart H 20 and the AquaCare, contain a reservoir for storage of the
air-abrasion particles and fluid and require only a connection from an
airline. Both devices contain a foot pedal that is used to activate the air
abrasion. The devices differ in that the former unit contains one reser­
voir, into which the aluminum-oxide, or alumina, abrasive particle of
choice may be inserted. The latter device has individual canisters for
each type of air-abrasion medium that can be interchanged as needed.
As for infection control, these devices have removable handpieces that
maybe sterilized in an autoclave. The PrepStart H 20 utilizes a water
reservoir that is filled by the user, so the waterlines must be flushed with
a disinfectant solution at the end of each day. The AquaCare device is
used with an accompanying fluid component that contains ethanol to
sterilize the fluid lines within the device.
Devices Connected to a Dental Unit
Devices th a t are connected to a dental u nit have the benefits of
requiring a sm aller footprint in the dental operatory and easier
mobility between operatories. Examples of these devices include
the RONDOflex plus 360 and the Bioclear Blaster. These instru­
ments have canisters that can be filled with the abrasive particles of
choice. W ater and air from the dental unit are used to run the device.
The devices either have removable tips that may be autoclaved or
the entire device may be autoclaved.
Abrasive Particles
Several different types of abrasive particles are available for in tra­
oral air abrasion that vary based on their abrasivity. Aluminum
oxide (alumina) is the main type of particle used to roughen and
“cut” tooth structure. Other, less abrasive particles have been used
to clean biofilm or stain from the surface of a tooth prior to bonding.
Aluminum Oxide
A lum inum oxide is a ceram ic particle th a t is the m ost abrasive
particle used intraorally. These particles are irregularly shaped,
www.compendiumlive.com
which m eans th at the rough edges on the particles may be abra­
sive. The density of alum ina is 3.95 g/cm 2. The particles can be
obtained with an average particle diam eter ranging from around
30 pm to 90 pm, with the larger particles (90 pm) being more abra­
sive.3 These particles are used for the creation of dental prepara­
tions, to either cut tooth structure or remove unwanted artifacts
w ithin a tooth preparation. Additionally, these particles may be
used for roughening dental materials, such as metals,4 ceramics,5
and com posite resins.6
Glass
Different forms of glass also have been examined for their capability
of removing or roughening tooth structure. Glass bead particles are
spherical and have a lower density than aluminum oxide. Typically
obtained in particles sizes between 50 pm and 90 pm, glass beads
are less abrasive than aluminum oxide on intact dentin and enamel.3
Practically, glass beads are not used for tooth preparation but are
indicated for certain cleaning procedures in which surface damage
should be minimized, such as removal of cem ent from tem porary
restorations or plaque from dentures. Glass bead particles may also
be used for cleaning metal instruments.
Bioactive glass also has been investigated for its use as an air-
abrasion particle in an effort to take advantage of its antibacterial
properties and rem ineralization potential. It was reported to be
less abrasive than aluminum oxide.2 In practice, bioactive glasses
may be used as abrasive particles that can occlude dentin tubules
to help prevent sensitivity.7
Cleaning Particles
Several types of particles exist purely for cleaning purposes, such
as sodium bicarbonate, glycine, calcium sodium phosphosilicate,
calcium carbonate, and alum inum trihydroxide.8A lab o rato ry
study determ ined th at air abrasion with each of these particles
except for glycine was abrasive enough to alter the surface of resin
com posite and glass ionomcr.9 Moreover, each of the three latter
particles—calcium sodium phosphosilicate, calcium carbonate,
and alum inum trihydroxide—was capable of altering the surface
of enam el.9 Despite this abrasive potential, all of these types of
particles are typically less abrasive than alum ina abrasive p arti­
cles.8 W ithin the realm of restorative dentistry, these particles
may all be used for the removal of plaque prior to placem ent of a
dental restoration.
TABLE 1
Shear Bond Strength to Tooth Structure
With and Without Air Abrasion
Adhesive W ithout Air W ith Air
System Abrasion Abrasion
(MPa) (MPa)
Enamel Etch-and-rinse 28.4 ± 6.7 30.4 ± 4.5
Etch-and-rinse 27.3 ± 5.2 24.9 ± 9.8
Dentin
Self-etch 22.8 ± 7.2 23.9 ± 3.6
September 2019 COMPENDIUM 509
 C O N T IN U IN G E D U C A T IO N 2 | A IR A B R A S IO N
Evidence for Air Abrasion’s Effect on Bonding
The effect of air abrasion on the bond to enamel and dentin has been
reported previously with mixed results. The results are dependent
on th e type ofadhesive used, w hether seif-etch or etch-and-rinse.
Previous Studies
Studies regarding shear bond strength after air abrasion on enamel
or dentin are contradictory. Some studies had positive results.
Mujdeci and Goka reported th a t air abrasion (25-pm alum ina at
120 psi) increased bond strength to enamel and dentin with a total-
etch system.® de Souza-Zaroni et al reported that air abrasion (27.5-
fim alum ina at 60 psi) increased bond strength to enamel with a
self-etch system but had no positive effect on enamel with an etch-
and-rinse system.11
On the other hand, other studies have reported that air abrasion
reduced bond strength. Nikaido et al found that air abrasion (at
41.8 psi) w ith 50-pm glass beads significantly decreased the bond
strengths to enamel and dentin (etch-and-rinse system), whereas
air abrasion w ith 50-pm alum ina decreased adhesion to enam el
510 COM PENDIUM Septem ber 2019
Fig 1. Enam el spe cim e n w ith o u t a ir abrasion b e fo re e tc h in g . Fig 2.
Enamel specim en w ith air abrasion b e fore etching. Fig 3. Enam el speci­
m en w ith o u t air abrasion a fte r etching. Fig 4. Enamel specim en w ith air
abrasion a fte r etching. Fig 5. Enamel specim en w ith air abrasion a fte r
etching, at high er m ag nification . Fig 6. D entin specim en w ith o u t air
abrasion before etching. Fig 7. D entin specim en w ith air abrasion be­
fo re etching. Fig 8. D entin specim en w ith o u t air abrasion a fte r etching.
Fig 9. D entin specim en w ith air abrasion a fte r etching. Fig TO. Dentin
specim en w ith air abrasion a fte r etching, a t high er m agnification .
but did not affect dentin (etch-and-rinse system).12The scanning
electron microscope (SEM) photographs suggested that possible
weakened tooth structure after air abrasion could result in adverse
bonding strength. Roeder e t al rep o rted th a t w hen air abrasion
(alumina at 120 psi) was used in place of phosphoric etching, a lower
bond to enamel and dentin was achieved.13
Furtherm ore, some studies found there was no difference in
bond strength to resin composite on either enamel or dentin after
alumina air abrasion. Los and Barkmeier showed no effect on the
bond to dentin with a self-etch system after air abrasion at 60 psi
with 50-pm alumina or 20-pm to 40-pm hydroxyapatite.14Similarly,
Roeder et al reported th at air abrasion (27-pm and 50-|nn alumina
at 120 psi) did not affect the bond to enam el and dentin w ith an
etch-and-rinse system.13
Laboratory Research
A study was undertaken for this review to examine the effect of air
abrasion on the bond to enamel (etch-and-rinse only) and dentin
(self-etch and etch-and-rinse). Following In stitu tio n al Review
Volume 40, N um ber 8
Board approval, freshly extracted human teeth were ground to
expose flat enamel (n = 20) or dentin (n = 40) and wet-polished to
320-grit silicon paper.
Half of the specimens (n = 10 enamel, n = 20 dentin) were treated
with an intraoral air-abrasion unit (PrepStart H20) for 10 seconds
with 50-(im alum ina particles (Aluminum Oxide 50 Micron,
Danville M aterials/Zest Dental Solutions) at 60-psi pressure.
The specimens were then rinsed with copious water spray. All of
the enamel specimens (n = 20) were etched with 37% phosphoric
acid (Scotchbond™ Universal Etchant, 3M Oral Care, 3m.com)
for 30 seconds. The dentin specimens were tested in either an
etch-and-rinse or self-etch mode. The dentin specimens in the
etch-and-rinse group (n = 20) were etched with 37% phosphoric
acid for 15 seconds prior to bonding. The dentin specimens in the
self-etch group (n = 20) received no etching prior to application
of the bonding agent. All specimens etched with phosphoric acid
were rinsed for 10 seconds with an air-water spray.
The bonding agent (Prelude One™, Danville Materials/Zest Dental
Solutions) was applied to all specimens (both the etch-and-rinse and
self-etch groups) following the manufacturer’s directions and light-
cured using an LED curing light (Elipar™ S10,3M Oral Care) with
output >800 mW/cm2. A cylinder (2.35-mm diameter) of composite

Fig 11. Air abrasion of enamel. Fig 12. Matte surface o f dean enamel after air abrasion prior to bonding. Fig 13 and Fig 14. Crown preparations with
tem porary cement remnants prior to air abrasion (Fig 13) and after air abrasion (Fig 14) (case by Mohammed Badahman, DDS). Fig 15 and Fig 16.
Cavity preparation prior to air abrasion (Fig 15) and after air abrasion (Fig 16).

www.compendiumlivc.com September 2019 COMPENDIUM 511

C O N T I N U I N G E D U C A T I O N 2 | AI R A B R A S I O N
Fig 17. A p plication o f tw o -to n e disclosing solution to reveal biofilm .
Fig 18. A ir abrasion w ith aluminum trihydroxide to remove biofilm.
Fig 19. Cleaned to o th surfaces after air abrasion prior to application
o f adhesive bonding resin com posite to close black triangles.
(Prestige™, Danville M aterials/Zest Dental Solutions) was placed
against the tooth surface and cured for 20 seconds from all directions.
Specimens were stored wet at 37°C for 24 hours and then ther-
mocycled (5°C and 55°C, 15-second dwell time, 10,000 cycles). The
specimens were subjected to shear-force loading until failure using
a universal testing machine (Instron' 5565, Instron, instron.us) at
the crosshead speed of 1 mm per minute. Representative specimens
were then viewed using SEM.
The shear bond strength for each group is presented in Table 1.
The effects of air abrasion on shear bond strength for both enamel
and dentin were compared separately. A f-test found no difference
in bond strength with air abrasion on enamel (P= .437), and a one­
way ANOVA found no difference on dentin (P= .515).
512 COMPENDIUM September 2019
The SEMs showed that air abrasion and phosphoric acid applied
texture to enamel (Figure 1through Figure 3) and that when enamel
was etched w ith phosphoric acid after air abrasion, the coarser
texture from air abrasion could still be seen through the etch pattern
(Figure 4 and Figure 5). This same trend was also observed in dentin
(Figure 6 through Figure 10). Despite the increased surface texture
(or roughness) created through air abrasion, the results of the shear
bond testing indicate that cleaning enamel or dentin with alumina
particle air abrasion at a relatively low pressure (60 psi) provides
no negative or positive effect on bond strength. Possibly, air abra­
sion of enamel with a self-etch system would have improved bond
strength similar to the study by de Souza-Zaroni et al.n
Clinical Applications
Cavity Preparation
Clinical advantages of perform ing cavity preparations using intra­
oral air abrasion instead of a rotary cutting bur include w hat has
been described as a m ore conservative p rep aratio n due to the
abrasive particles being able to remove tooth structure in smaller
increm ents than even the smallest burs and the potential to selec­
tively remove only carious orotherw ise unwanted tooth structure.15
I lowever, several studies have examined the ability of air abrasion
to selectively remove carious dentin while leaving sound dentin
and enamel unaffected, and even with varying the types of abrasive
particles and air pressure, air abrasion could not selectively remove
carious dentin.3’1617Additionally, one study determ ined th at air
abrasion with alumina was more effective at removing sound tooth
structure than carious tooth structure.16
The use of air abrasion to “cut” a preparation takes longer than
using a ro tary cu ttin g in stru m en t; however, th e re are various
param eters that can affect the cutting efficiency with air abrasion.
The air pressure of the device has been shown to linearly increase
cutting rate up to 100 psi.mThe recom m ended air pressure for
cutting tooth stru ctu re for the air-abrasion unit used in the pres­
ent study is 100 psi; therefore, the operator should ensure th at the
air pressure exiting the airline is sufficient to achieve this pressure.
The particle flow rate also can affect cutting efficiency, b ut it
needs to be adjusted based on the air pressure. The abrasive parti­
cles require a certain speed in order to cut. If the particle flow rate
is increased without sufficient air pressure, the volume of particles
will not be sufficiently propelled and the additional particles will
only contribute to excess dust.19Ensuring that a sufficient am ount
of abrasive particles are in the device’s canister prior to and during
use is also im portant, as this will affect the particle flow rate.20
Finally, the angle at which the tip is held relative to the surface
being abraded and the distance of the tip from th e surface being
abraded both will affect cutting efficiency. H olding th e nozzle
at 60 degrees to the surface being abraded will allow efficient
v-shaped cutting, and m ain tain in g a 5-m m d istan ce from the
nozzle to the enam el surface has been shown to produce the most
efficient cutting.18
A nother benefit of intraoral air abrasion is patient com fort. A
clinical trial compared the preparation of fissure caries (at the depth
of the dentinoenam el junction) in prem olars of the same patient
with air abrasion and a rotary cutting handpiece. No anesthesia
Volume 40, Number 8
was used. The patients reported a significantly lower perception
of pain with air abrasion, and all patients preferred the treatment
with air abrasion.19
Preparation Cleaning
Air abrasion with alumina also can be used as an adjunctive proce­
dure for cleaning tooth preparations prior to bonding. As mentioned
previously, the results of testing the effects of air abrasion on dentin
and enamel prior to bonding are varied.1014Additionally, air abra­
sion for selective caries removal seems to be ineffective.W6,17
With these limitations acknowledged, visual inspection of tooth
preparations after air abrasion reveals that this modality is effec­
tive in removing remnant restorative materials, stains, and tempo­
rary cement, leaving a clean, matte surface for bonding (Figure
11 through Figure 14). Air abrasion also can smooth the internal
aspects of a cavity preparation to help enable better adaptation of
the restorative material (Figure 15 and Figure 16). The technique-
sensitive nature of adhesive bonding may justify this extra proce­
dure to ensure a clean, smooth preparation.
Biofilm Removal
Air abrasion with aluminum trihydroxide has been used as an adjunc­
tive for tooth preparation to remove plaque, light calculus, under­
mined enamel, poorly bonded resins or liners, and soft-tissue tags
prior to bonding. The rationale of biofilm removal before bonding is
to remove any impediments to effective etching of enamel that may
lead to reduced bond strength and microgaps that could contribute
to future stain and leakage. Because biofil m can be difficult to visual­
ize, a one-time application of a two-tone disclosing solution to dried
teeth may help reveal biofilm and provide a visual cue for effective
removal (Figure 17 through Figure 19). Some cleaning particles other
than glycine or sodium bicarbonate can alter the enamel surface;
therefore, reapplication of disclosing solution should be avoided as
this may lead to risk of undesired staining of tooth structure.
Summary
Air abrasion can be a means of cavity preparation or an adjunctive
procedure for tooth preparation with adhesive dental restorations.
Although the evidence for air abrasion as a method to improve the
retention to dentin and enamel is mixed, air abrasion can be visually
confirmed to clean and smooth preparations prior to bonding, with­
out anesthesia in some cases. When using air abrasion for restorative
dentistry, the abrasive particles and device parameters should be
opti mized for the procedure at hand.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Chan-Te Huang, DDS
ChiefResident, University of Alabama at Birmingham School ofDentistry. Birmingham,
Alabama; Attending Faculty, Chang Gang Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan
Jihyon Kim, DDS
Private Practice, Bellevue, Washington
Celin Arce, DDS, MS
Assistant Professor, University of Alabama at Birmingham School ofDentistry,
Birmingham Alabama
www.compendiumlive.com
Nathaniel C. Lawson, DMD, PhD
Assistant Professor, University ofAlabama at Birmingham School of Dentistry,
Birmingham, Alabama
Queries to the author regarding this course may be submitted to
authorqueries@aegiscomm.com.
REFERENCES
1. The glossary of prosthodontic terms: ninth edition. J Prosthet Dent.
2017;117(5S):e1-e105.
2. Milly H, Austin RS, Thompson 1, Banerjee A. In vitro effect of air-
abrasion operating parameters on dynamic cutting characteristics of
alumina and bio-active glass powders. Oper Dent. 2014;39(l):81-89.
3. Horiguchi S, Yamada T, Inokoshi S, Tagami J. Selective caries re­
moval with air abrasion. Oper Dent. 1998;23(5):236-243.
4. Kern M, Thompson VP. Sandblasting and silica-coating of dental al­
loys: volume loss, morphology and changes in the surface composition.
Dent Mater. 1993;9(3):151-161.
5. Inokoshi M, De Munck J, Minakuchi S, Van Meerbeek B. Meta-analysis
of bonding effectiveness to zirconia ceramics. J Dent Res. 2014:93(4):
329-334.
6. Spitznagel FA, Horvath SD, Guess PC, Blatz MB. Resin bond to in­
direct composite and new ceramic/polymer materials: a review of the
literature. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26(6):382-393.
7. Sauro S, Watson TF, Thompson I, Dentine desensitization induced by
prophylactic and air-polishing procedures: an in vitro dentine perme­
ability and confocal microscopy study. J Dent. 2010;38(5):411-422.
8. Graumann SJ, Sensat ML, Stoltenberg JL. Air polishing: a review of
current literature. J Dent Hyg. 2013;87(4):173-180.
9. Barnes CM, Covey D, Watanabe H, et al. An in vitro comparison of
the effects of various air polishing powders on enamel and selected
esthetic restorative materials, J Clin Dent. 2014;25(4):76-87.
10. Mujdeci A, Gokay O. The effect of airborne-particle abrasion on the
shear bond strength of four restorative materials to enamel and dentin.
J Prosthet Dent. 2004;92(3):245-249.
11. de Souza-Zaroni WC, Delfino CS, Ciccone-Nogueira JC, et al. Ef­
fect of cavity preparation method on microtensile bond strength of a
self-etching primer vs phosphoric acid etchant to enamel. J Mater Sci
Mater Med. 2007;18(10):2003-2009.
12. Nikaido T, Kataumi M, Burrow MF, et al. Bond strengths of resin to
enamel and dentin treated with low-pressure air abrasion. Oper Dent.
1996;21(5):218-224.
13. Roeder LB, Berry EA 3rd, You C, Powers JM. Bond strength of com­
posite to air-abraded enamel and dentin. Oper Dent. 1995;20(5):186-190.
14. Los SA, Barkmeier WW. Effects of dentin air abrasion with alumi­
num oxide and hydroxyapatite on adhesive bond strength. Oper Dent.
1994;19(5):169-175.
15. Malterud Ml. Air abrasion: the new renaissance with an H20 twist.
Dent Today. 2010;29(10):146-149.
16. Paolinelis G, Watson TF, Banerjee A. Microhardness as a predictor
of sound and carious dentine removal using alumina air abrasion. Car­
ies Res. 2006;40(4):292-295.
17. Motisuki C, Lima LM, Bronzi ES, et al. The effectiveness of alumina
powder on carious dentin removal. Oper Dent. 2006;31(3):371-376.
18. Paolinelis G, Banerjee A, Watson TF. An in-vitro investigation of the
effects of variable operating parameters on alumina air-abrasion cut­
ting characteristics. Oper Dent. 2009;34(1):87-92.
19. Malmstrom HS, Chaves Y, Moss ME. Patient preference: convention­
al rotary handpieces or air abrasion for cavity preparation. Oper Dent.
2003;28(6):667-671.
20. Banerjee A, Uddin M, Paolinelis G, Watson TF. An investiga­
tion of the effect of powder reservoir volume on the consistency
of alumina powder flow rates in dental air-abrasion devices. J Dent.
2008;36(3):224-227.
S e p t e m b e r 2019 C OMPENDIUM 513
 CONTINUING EDUCATION 2
QUIZ

Intraoral Air Abrasion: A Review of Devices, Materials,

Evidence, and Clinical Applications in Restorative Dentistry
Chan-Te Huang, DDS; Jihyon Kim, DDS; Celin Arce, DDS, MS; and Nathaniel C. Lawson, DMD, PhD

This article provides 2 hours of CE credit from AEGIS Publications, LLC. Record your answers on the enclosed Answer Form or submit them on a separate
sheet of paper. You may also phone your answers in to 877-423-4471 or fax them to 215-504-1502 or log on to compendiumce.com/go/1916. Be sure to include
your name, address, telephone number, and last 4 digits of your Social Security number.

Please complete Answer Form on page 515, including your name and payment information.
YOU CAN ALSO TAKE THIS COURSE ONLINE AT COMPENDIUMCE.COM/GO/1916.

1. The purpose of adding a shroud of water to an air-abrasion 5. In a laboratory study, which of the following particles was not
device is: abrasive enough to alter the surface of resin composite and
A. to propel the abrasive particles, glass ionomer?
B. to cool the tooth. A. calcium sodium phosphosilicate
C. to control the spray of abrasive particles. B. calcium carbonate
D. to prevent occlusion of dentin tubules. C. aluminum trihydroxide
D. glycine
2. Standalone air-abrasion devices usually offer such versatility
features as: 7. In the study performed for this article, the results of the shear
A. a smaller footprint than devices connected to a dental unit. bond testing indicate that air abrasion with alumina particle
B. the ability to adjust the particle and water shrouding flow rates. at a relatively low pressure:
C. the ability to adjust the unit's voltage. A. improved the bond to dentin.
D. easier mobility than devices connected to a dental unit. B. weakened the bond to enamel.
C. improved the bond to both dentin and enamel.
3. Which is the main type of particle used to roughen and “cut” D. had no effect on bond strength to dentin or enamel.
tooth structure?
A. aluminum oxide 8. With regard to cavity preparation, in several studies using
B. glass beads varying types of abrasive particles and air pressure, air abrasion:
C. sodium bicarbonate A. was unable to remove either carious or sound dentin.
D. calcium carbonate B. was effectively able to selectively remove carious dentin.
C. could not selectively remove carious dentin.
4. Which is the most abrasive particle used intraorally? D. selectively removed only carious dentin.
A. sodium bicarbonate
B. calcium carbonate 9. A clinical trial comparing the preparation of fissure caries with
C. aluminum trihydroxide air abrasion and rotary cutting determined that:
D. aluminum oxide A. air abrasion removes tooth structure faster.
B. air abrasion causes more postoperative sensitivity.
5. Glass bead particles are indicated for: C. patients reported a lower perception of pain with
A. tooth preparation. air abrasion.
B. removal of cement from temporary restorations. D. patients preferred the treatment with rotary cutting.
C. applications that require more abrasivity than aluminia.
D. cutting tooth structure. 10. Air abrasion with aluminum trihydroxide has been used as an
adjunctive for tooth preparation to:
A. cut tooth.
B. remove biofilm (ie, plaque, light calculus, etc).
C. remineralize the tooth.
D. desensitize the tooth.

Course is valid from September 1,2019, to September 30,2022.

Participants m ust attain a score of 70% on each quiz to receive
cred it. P articip a n ts receiving a failing grade on any exam
/V A
L V _ >
E .D . D
L l \ r
® I Continuing Education
| Recognition Program

AEGIS Publications, LLC, is an ADA CERP Recognized Provider. ADA

CERP is a service of the American Dental Association to assist dental
will be notified and permitted to take one re-examination. professionals in identifying quality providers ofcontinuing dental
A
A cadem y
of General Dentistry
Approved PACE Program Provider
FAGD/MAGD Credit
Approval does not imply acceptance
education. ADA CERP does not approve or endorse individual courses
Participants will receive an annual report docum enting their by a state or provincial board of
or instructors, nor does it imply acceptance of credit hours by hoards of
dentistry. Concerns or complaints about a CE provider may be directed PACE dentistry or AGD endorsement
accum ulated credits, and are urged to contact their own state
to the provider or to ADA CERP at www.ada.org/cerp. Program Approval for 1/1/2017 to 12/31/2022
Continuing Education
registry boards for special CE requirem ents. Provider ID# 209722

514 - C O M P E N D IU M S e p te m b e r 2019 V olum e 40, N u m b e r 8

 Copyright of Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry (15488578) is the property
of AEGIS Communications, LLC and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

View publication stats