Abstract

Dental impression materials are essential for recording the characteristics of intraoral structures and creating accurate models of hard and soft tissues.  Professionals must follow manufacturer guidelines to preserve the material properties and ensure predictability in the impression process.

Case Report: A 20-year-old male presented to the Emergency Department of Stomatology at Hospital Santa Maria with an inability to remove a metallic tray retained in the maxilla for approximately 15 hours. The incident occurred during an at-home dental impression practice, where plaster was mistakenly used instead of alginate. Clinical examination revealed a closed metallic tray embedded in the maxilla. The tray was sectioned using a turbine and diamond spherical bur, followed by removal of the consolidated plaster using a handpiece and carbide bur. No dental or mucosal injuries were observed. Post-procedural assessments at 1 and 5 months confirmed intact oral tissues and preserved tooth sensitivity.

Conclusion: Dental impression procedures require proper training and should be performed in controlled environments. Adherence to manufacturer instructions during material preparation is crucial to prevent complications. This case emphasizes the importance of knowledge about dental materials, expertise in their handling, and preparedness to address potential complications.

Keywords: Dental impression, plaster, dental impression complications

Keywords

• Calcium Sulfate
• Dental Impression Technique
• Dental Materials
• Foreign Bodies
• Maxilla

References

• Ricketts, D. Advanced operative dentistry: a practical approach; Churchill Livingstone, Elsevier: Edinburgh, 2011.
• Punj, A.; Bompolaki, D.; Garaicoa, J. Dental impression materials and techniques. Dent Clin North Am 2017, 61, 779–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.004.
• Hou, R.; Zhou, H.; Hu, K.; Ding, Y.; Yang, X.; Xu, G.; Xue, P.; Shan, C.; Jia, S.; Ma, Y. Thorough documentation of the accidental aspiration and ingestion of foreign objects during dental procedures is necessary: review and analysis of 617 cases. Head Face Med 2016, 12, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-016-0120-2.
• Negrete, J.R.; Carrillo, M.D.; Molina, G.A.; Ayala, O.A.V.; Flores, D.; Castillo, D. Do not open wide; accidentally swallowed dental mould causing bowel obstruction. A case report. J Surg Case Rep 2022, 2022, rjac384. https://doi.org/10.1093/jscr/rjac384.
• Bateman, G.; Saha, S. Aspiration of dental impression material — a case report. Dent Update 2017, 44, 986–987.
• Chauhan, V.S.; Mir, M.A. Plaster burn: challenge to plastic surgeon. World J Plast Surg 2018, 7, 226–230.
• Syed, M.; Chopra, R.; Sachdev, V. Allergic reactions to dental materials — a systematic review. J Clin Diagn Res 2015, 9, ZE04–ZE09. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589.
• Jain, M.J.; Mavani, K. Lethal necrotizing fasciitis triggered by plaster: case report and review of literature. J Orthop Case Rep 2016, 6, 73–75. https://doi.org/10.13107/jocr.2250-0685.640.
• Rai, A.; Mittal, M.; Mittal, S. Accidental ingestion of plaster of Paris causing thermal injury of the oesophagus and stomach in a toddler. Indian Pediatr Case Rep 2023, 3, 234–236. https://doi.org/10.4103/ipcares.ipcares_133_23.
• Yegane, R.A.; Bashashati, M.; Bashtar, R.; Ahmadi, M. Gastrointestinal obstruction due to plaster ingestion: a case report. BMC Surg 2006, 6, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-6-4.

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Metrics

Categories

• Oral Surgery

Paper information