There are many ways dentists can restore teeth prosthetically. Depending on its condition of relative integrity or more serious breakdown and the patient’s loss of other teeth, the practitioner can choose from a variety of quite different procedures ranging from the fabrication of a single ceramo-ceramic crown on a vital tooth to correction of considerable loss of teeth with an implant supported bridge. This paper will evaluate most of these treatment modalities and, in addition to purely prosthetic considerations, will discuss the integration into treatment of periodontal, implant, occlusal, and functional concepts.

The exchange of position of two adjacent teeth constitutes a transposition. Maxillary canines are rarely affected; transpositions of upper canines occur in only .2% of the orthodontic population. They can be detected early in radiographic examinations and later, clinically, after they begin to erupt. Most writers affirm that transpositions, which are often associated with other dental anomalies, are caused primarily by some genetic defect but that local factors may contribute to their development. Practitioners should consider their muco-gingiva environment as an important factor in their evaluation of the iatrogenic risks that might accompany treatment and consider improving soft tissue status as a preparatory soft tissue therapeutic procedure. They must also differentiate between cases of incomplete transposition and partial complete transposition, which can almost always be successfully treated, from cases of total complete transposition that are relatively difficult if not impossible to treat.

Impacted upper canines occur, in buccal or palatal sites, in about 3% of the population and pose a threat to neighbouring teeth. Before orthodontists can bring them into their proper positions in the arch, oral surgeons often have to uncover them. In this article we discuss the traction pathways, open or tunnelised, that orthodontists can then use to begin moving them. While orthodontists can use both techniques successfully, they should understand the advantages and disadvantages of both before making a decision.

The periodontium plays a predominant role in the healthy stability of the dentition in general and of canine teeth in particular. After reviewing the make-up of healthy periodontal tissue and evaluating the situations where it is at risk, we describe different techniques of muco-gingival surgery that are applicable to canines.

We then illustrate the integration of periodontal data in treatment planning for orthodontic treatment of impacted canine teeth with clinical cases where our therapeutic choices have a certain original quality.

This article reports our study, carried out as a CECSMO assignment, assessing the effectiveness of resin modified glass ionomer cement as a bonding agent on enamel over a two year period and a consideration of the relative influence of two brands of attachments, Orthos and Damon. In our study group we had an overall rate of bonding rupture of 11.6%. 17% of direct and 33% of the indirect bondings loosened in the first trimester. Globally, the direct bonding had a higher survival rate, which was, after one year, 95.2% for the direct bonding and 90.7% for the indirect. The survival rate of attachments bonded to second molars was the lowest for all the teeth in the arch with Damon Indirect recorded at .889 after a year and Orthos Indirect .524 after a year. We categorized our results in relation to the characteristics of our sample (its size, its heterogeneity, and the duration of the observation period) and in relation to the characteristics of the attachments (their size and the surface and type of their bases) and in relation to the protocols (of indirect bonding, of preparation of enamel surface, of photopolymerization, of placement of the first arch, of bracket size, of ligature placement, and type of mechano-therapy used).

Our study confirmed the hypothesis that direct or indirect bonding with Fuji Ortho LC@ functions effectively in the daily practice of orthodontics. Our rates of accidental attachment debonding and our rates of bonding survival were acceptable except in Orthos indirect bonding of mandibular teeth. We found that under the conditions of our study direct bonding functioned slightly better than indirect bonding. Practitioners need to know and understand certain parameters influencing the use of resin modified glass-ionomer cement for bonding orthodontic attachments in order to optimize its success notable with regard to the choice of attachments with respect to bonding material or the effect of overbite on retention of attachments. Furthermore, the multiplicity of interfaces and of materials utilized in indirect bonding weakened bond strength under the conditions and protocols of our study.