Home > Research > Occlusion and Cervical Lesions – great article by Gary Unterbrink

Occlusion and Cervical Lesions – great article by Gary Unterbrink

The latest copy of the online magazine Apex features a great article by Dr Gary Unterbrink (of Lichtenstein) on the aetiology of non-carious cervical lesions, sometimes known as “abfraction” lesions.

As many of you will know, this is a controversial area with many opposing camps, but Gary dissects the evidence and comes up with an elegant explanation, supported by a large number of references.

I’m happy to say this fits in with what we have always taught at SDS, but he puts it across so well I have now decided to make this article required reading for our delegates. Accordingly, I hope to include this article in the 4th module of the Introduction to Occlusion Part 1 distance learning package, so our delegates will see this as part of an understanding of the role of clenching and bruxism in the aetiology of what we like to call “occlusal disease”.

I’ll be interested to know what you think, so please post your comments here.

The excellent Apex ezine is well worth subscribing to HERE

Advertisements
  1. October 2, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    Dear Dr’s Andy Lane and Roy Higson,
    I enjoyed Dr.Unterbrink’s article about Occlusion and cervical lesions, but was rather put off when he referred to Dental Compression Syndrome as something that happens to patients in California, sounds serious, and probably requires extensive therapy. If he had been more thorough in his research, he would have learned that I was the first to describe what these peculiar defects really are and their etiology ( hard tissue fatigue due to compression failure). McCoy G. The Etiology of Gingival Erosion. J Oral Implantol 1982; 10:361-2. A more thorough description of these deformations can be found in my publication; On the Longevity of Teeth. J. Oral Implant. 1983; II: 249-67. The abfraction is just one of the many deformations that occur in the oral environment due to Dental Compression Failure. Unfortunately, the dental profession is sadly ignorant about this phenomenon as we are not taught the principles of engineering in dental school as engineering is explained in calculus, and we drop high math and focus more on chemistry. A knowledge of engineering principles is so important in designing prostheses. Sharp teeth cut food better than flat teeth. Common sense right? So why do we put zero degree occlusion in patients who wear dentures and have lost 75% of their masticatory power? Thank you for allowing me to vent.
    I really enjoyed your blog. Please visit http://www.toothcrunch.com
    Warm Regards,
    Gene McCoy
    San Francisco

  2. Dr Sanjay
    October 9, 2010 at 4:46 pm

    Dr McCoy as an aside, so are you suggesting that only sharp teeth in dentures make sense? Obviously flat teeth are put as a part of “balanced occlussion”. In my practice I realised early that many dental technicians had difficulty with balanced occlusion (in my country) and I thought the next best thing was to use cusped teeth. For me it wasn’t much of a choice but I wanted your take on what you think is preferable. I presume yu too use cusped teeth for dentures.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: