Main

Goldstein RE, Lamba S et al. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017; 29: 41–48

There would appear to be no evidence for, nor against, as to whether or not tooth scaling is associated with increased tooth sensitivity (Am J Dent 2013 26: 21–27). However, there are concerns that the use of ultrasonic scalers may disrupt the marginal integrity of restorations. In this in vitro study, the use of a piezoelectric ultrasonic device (Varios 750, NSK-Nakanishi Inc) at full power, but not the use of a sonic toothbrush (Sonicare, Philips Sonicare), was associated with microleakage at the cementum-composite interface but not the enamel-composite interface. Bevelling the margins of the cavity had no effect. These observations were of no surprise as sonic toothbrushes operate at 260 cycles per second whereas piezoelectric scalers vibrate at 25,000–50,000 cycles per second. The investigators cite another study that found the use of magnetorestrictive ultrasonic scaling (the enduring Cavitron 660, Dentsply) had no effect of tooth restoration marginal integrity. Magnetorestrictive ultrasonic tips vibrate in an elliptical pattern and are active on all sides of the tip, whereas piezoelectric tips vibrate in a linear motion.