Our guide to safe chews can be downloaded here.Īn interesting public service flier about feeding bones to dogs was posted online by the US Food & Drug Administration. This means a complete change in the advice vets give owners about what is "good for teeth". It's not if it breaks a tooth! Our advice on toys for dogs is very simple - if you can't pit the surface with a finger nail it's too hard. If the toy has a degree of longevity it is percieved as "good value for money". Theere are no crushing teeth in the mouth of a dog - hence the problem of providing toys that are hard. Normally the teeth will be used to cut flesh into strips they can swallow. When the sharp cusp of a tooth comes into contact with a toy it has to be able to enter it by a few millimetres if it is not to break. This force is very easy to achieve, particularly when the dog bites an object that has no "give" in it. Research from 1998 (Duke A) proved the main cusp of an upper carnassial tooth of a 20kg dog will fracture with 90 Kg of force (KgF). What can fracture a tooth in a dog or cat? The answer is surprisingly small amounts of force. The success of root canal treatment in dogs is quoted as 95% (Kuntsi-Vaattovaara 2002: JAVMA 220, 6). When root filled they still provide function and stability to the symphysis. For some teeth (lower canines are a good example) it can be far easier and less invasive to root fill them than remove them. There is usually an alternative available - see the description of root filling below. Animals are conditioned to respond differently, are much more stoic and have no concept that they can be helped.įractured teeth do not always have to be removed. As painful as it would be if you broke a tooth and exposed the pulp yourself. In the same sentence as being told the dog or cat has a fractured tooth we are often told "and it's not painful". We recently updated our news page article. We field telephone calls on this subject daily. This study indicated that mechanically exposed and orally contaminated dental pulps in monkeys have a high capacity to resolve inflammation and initiate healing with new dentin formation at the exposure site when treated as described.This is the most common reason for case referral in this practice. Treated 7 day exposures healed less frequently, showing signs of dentin bridging in 15 of 27 teeth. Treated 0, 1 and 24 h exposures demonstrated wound healing, minimal pulp tissue inflammation, reorganization of soft tissue and formation of new hard tissue at the exposure site in 86 of 99 teeth. In addition, the 7 day exposures demonstrated several teeth with partial and total necrosis. Zero and 1 h untreated exposures presented damage from the mechanical trauma only, whereas 24 h and 7 day pulp wounds exhibited pronounced infiltrations of polymorphonuclear and mononuclear leukocytes. Class V buccal cavity preparations resulting in pulpal exposure were prepared, left open to the oral cavity for 0, 1, 24 h or 7 days and employed as controls, or debrided, capped, restored with amalgam and left undisturbed for 5 weeks as treated exposures. One hundred eighty teeth in 7 monkeys were employed, 45 as untreated controls and 135 as treated exposures. The healing capacity of mechanically exposed and bacterially contaminated dental pulps was assessed in monkeys after capping with 2 commercial Ca(OH)2 containing compounds.
0 kommentar(er)
