Advertisement

Effect of placing, removing and polishing of amalgam restorations on 24-h urinary mercury concentration

  • Y. Haikel
  • F. Livardjani
  • C. Allemann
  • A. Jaeger
  • A. A. Lugnier
  • J. H. Meurman
Article

Twenty-four-hour urinary mercury concentration were assessed in 43 patients before and after removing old amalgam fillings (8 pts), placing (13 pts), and polishing of amalgam (22 pts). Baseline analyses 8 days before the treatments showed on average 18.5±7.2 μg mercury mass excreted per 24-h urine samples. The removal of old fillings caused a total excreted mass of 56.3±32.3 μg Hg, the placing of amalgam 45.9±26.2 μg Hg, and the polishing 56.25±33.77 μg Hg, respectively, one day after the treatments. When compared with the baseline values, the urinary mass excreted remained significantly elevated during the 8-day follow-up. However, all Hg values measured were below the WHO recommandations for the threshold limits for urinary mercury.

Keywords

Polymer Mercury Urine Sample Mercury Concentration Threshold Limit 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. W. SVARE, L. C. PETERSON, J. W. REINHARDT, D. B. BOYER, C. W. FRANK, D. D. GAY and R. D. COX, J. Dent. Res. 60 (1981) 1668.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. J. VIMY and F. L. LORCHEIDER, J. Dent. Res. 64 (1985) 1069.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. E. PATTERSON, B. G. WEISSBERG and P. J. DENISSON, B. Environ. Contam. Tox. 34 (1985) 459.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. BRUNE, A. HENSTEN-PETTERSEN and H. BELTESBREKKE, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 88 (1980) 460.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. E. MOBERG, Acta Odontol. Scand. 43 (1985) 163.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. BRUNE, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 89 (1981) 506.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. L. OLSTAD, R. I. HOLLAND, N. WANDEL and A. HENSTEN PETTERSEN, J. Dent. Res. 66 (1987) 1179.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. LANGWORTH, C. G. ELINDER and A. AKESSON, Swed. Dent. J. 12 (1988) 69.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. MOLIN, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 100 (1992) 66.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH, Adv. Dent. Res. 6 (1992) 3.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. MAYER, Dtsch Zahnarztl. Z. 35 (1980) 450.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. W. REINHARDT, D. B. BOYER, C. W. SVARE, C. W. FRANK, R. D. COX and D. D. GAY, J. Prosthet. Dent. 49 (1983) 652.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Y. HAÏKEL, P. GASSER, P. SALEK and J-C. VOEGEL, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 24 (1990) 1551.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. W. REINHARDT, K. C. CHAN and T. M. SCHULEIN, J. Prosthet. Dent. 50 (1983) 62.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. L. COOLEY and W. W. BARKMEYER, J. Indiana Dent. Assoc. 57 (1978) 28.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. BRUNE, N. GJERDET and G. PAULSEN, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 91 (1983) 66.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. W. RICHARDS and P. J. WARREN, Brit. Dent. J. 159 (1985) 231.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. G. CHERIAN, J. B. HURSCH, T. W. CLARJKON and J. ALLEN, Arch. Environ. Health 33 (1978) 109.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    F. LIVARDJANI, R. HEIMBURGER, A. A. LUGNIER and A. JAEGER, Analusis 22 (1994) 311.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    W. R. HATCH and W. L. OTT, Anal. Chem. 40 (1968) 2085.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. MAYER and W. DIEHL, Dtsch Zahnarzt. Z. 31 (1976) 855.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    T. DERAND and B. JOHANSSON, Scand. J. Dent. Res. 91 (1983) 55.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. L. OLSTAD, R. I. HOLLAND and A. HENSTEN PETTERSEN, J. Dent. Res. 69 (1990) 1607.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    K. H. R. OTT, J. VOGLER, A. KRONKE, K. H. SCHALLER, H. VALENTI and D. WELTLE, Dtsch Zahnarztl. Z. 44 (1989) 551.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    K. O. FRYKHOLM, Acta Odontol. Scand. 15 (1957) 1 (suppl. 22).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. MOLIN, B. BERGMAN, S. MARKLUND, A. SCHUTZ and S. SKERFVING, Acta Odontol. Scand. 48 (1990) 189.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. LIE, N. GUNDERSEN and K. J. KORSGAARD, Scand. J. Work Env. 8 (1982) 129.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. B. JACOBS, A. C. LADD and L. J. COLDWATER, Arch. Environ. Health 9 (1964) 454.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. Environmental health criteria 118. Inorganic mercury. WHO, Geneva, 1991.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    J. E. ABRAHAM, C. W. SVARE and C. W. FRANK, J. Dent. Res. 63 (1984) 71.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    C. NALEWAY, R. SAKAGUCHI, E. MICHELL, T. MULLER, A. AYER and J. J. HEFFERREN, J. Amer. Dent. Assoc. 111 (1985), 37.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    C. O. ENWONWU, Environ. Res. 42 (1987) 257.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    T. W. CLARKSON, Ann. Rev. Public Health 4 (1987) 375.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    T. W. CLARKSON, in “Biological aspects of metals and metal related diseases”, edited by B. SARKER (Raven Press, New York, 1983) pp. 183–197.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    MAC., Arch. Environ. Health 19 (1969) 891.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    H. ROELS, R. LAUWERYS, J. P. BUCHERT, A. BERNARD and A. BARTHELS, Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 50 (1982) 273.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    J. W. OSBORNE, Adv. Dent. Res. 6 (1992) 135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Haikel
    • 1
  • F. Livardjani
    • 2
    • 3
  • C. Allemann
    • 1
  • A. Jaeger
    • 2
  • A. A. Lugnier
    • 3
  • J. H. Meurman
    • 4
  1. 1.Centre de Recherches OdontologiquesINSERM U. 424StrasbourgFrance
  2. 2.Centre Anti-PoisonULP, Hopitaux universitairesStrasbourgFrance
  3. 3.Laboratoire de ToxicologieUFR Sciences PharmaceutiquesStrasbourgFrance
  4. 4.Faculty of DentistryUniversity of KuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations