. Elementary and dental radiography . Fig. in patient eight years old. (Radiograph by Schamberg, of New York.) temporary tooth and extracted when the patient was about seven oreight years old—a mistake which could not have happened had the dentistused radiographs. Fig. 131 proves the absence of a second bicus- Tigs. 131 and 132. pid and shows that bridgework must be resorted to, to fill the space. Fig. 132 discloses the presence of a second bicuspid and shows that it will not be necessary to make a bridge. As they appeared before radiographs were taken the cases, from which Figs. 13
. Elementary and dental radiography . Fig. in patient eight years old. (Radiograph by Schamberg, of New York.) temporary tooth and extracted when the patient was about seven oreight years old—a mistake which could not have happened had the dentistused radiographs. Fig. 131 proves the absence of a second bicus- Tigs. 131 and 132. pid and shows that bridgework must be resorted to, to fill the space. Fig. 132 discloses the presence of a second bicuspid and shows that it will not be necessary to make a bridge. As they appeared before radiographs were taken the cases, from which Figs. 131 and 132 were made, were similar. Fig. 133, a case of Dr. Oyers, shows aTig. 133. badly impacted lower second bicuspid with no space at all for it in the dental arch. i;_ DENTAL RADIOGRAPHY With the exception of the third molars no teeth fig, i34, are so liable to be delayed in their eruption as the upper cuspids. For this reason, when making a radiograph to determine the presence or absence of an unerupted cuspid. Fig. patient. n]y Sclianiberg, of New York.) or a third molar, 1 feel tolerably sure, before I make the picture, thatthe tooth will be found somewhere in the jaw. When the missing toothis a central, lateral, bicuspid, or lower cuspid, I am in doubt as towhat to expect. My experience teaches me that when these teeth aremissing they are just as likely to be entirely absent from the jaw aspresent in it. and simply unerupted. So far, I have never seen eitherlong delayed eruption or congenital absence of the first r second the tir-t publication of the above. Dr. Ottolengui has reportedtwo interesting cases (Items of Interest, February [9, [913), fromwhich record I quote in part, as follows: THE US US OF THE RADIOGRAPH IN DENTISTRY [53 Very shortly after Dr. Raper had published themissing quoted statement, that up to that time he had not first molar. seen a case wherein first or second molars were con- genially absent,
Size: 1855px × 1347px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, bookpublisheretcet, bookyear1913
