Prof. Dr. Simone Grandini & Dr. Pavolucci

The patient, Y. 9 years old, showed up at our dental office after a trauma involving the frontal area of his mouth. Once it was determined that it was a simple accident (the boy had been playing with some friends when he fell), he was examined.

On examination the patient was found to have a fracture (Ellis class III with pulpal exposure) on tooth 1.1, physiological mobility of the tooth itself and of other teeth, a slight swelling on the inside of his upper lip, slight pain and poor plaque control. Figures 1-2

The patient had the fractured fragment with him, which was immediately immersed in physiological solution. The pulpal exposure was small and not bleeding, so the decision was taken to proceed with the reattachment of the fragment and the direct reconstruction of the missing portion. After a local anesthesia with articaine, the operative field was quite difficult due to the mixed dentition of the patient. The surface area was lightly cleaned using a toothbrush, after which the adhesive system Tokuyama EE-Bond (7 ^ generation with enamel etching) was applied both on the tooth and on the fragment. The latter was repositioned with interposition of a thin layer of flowable composite. Figures 3-4-5

After curing Figure 6, a double bevel was created along the fracture line, both on the vestibular and the palatal sides. This was performed to increase the adhesive strength of the fragment Figures 8-9; to give it regular margins, and to allow the direct restoration of the missing part.

The adhesive system was applied once again Figure 10, and a freehand stratification was carried out. Figure 11

The initial aesthetic analysis had shown the presence of a marked area of incisal translucency and a clear halo on the edge. NE (Estelite Asteria) was applied as a first layer on the palatal side, followed by a buildup of body A2. Following the manufacturer’s instruction, the body was applied as far as the medium third surface, while room was left for a thin layer of enamel NE in the incisal third. Figure 12 To recreate the enamel translucency, TE was used between the body mamelons, while the halo was reproduced using body A2. Figure 13

After finishing Figure 14 and polishing Figure 15 the patient was sent home and contacted periodically in the following days for news on possible pulpal symptomatology. In the control picture at 7 days Figure 16 the excellent integration of the restoration can be appreciated.

The integration of the composite used, and the simplicity of the layering procedure, have enabled us to immediately achieve a satisfactory result without need of re-treatment.