My first upper right molar is starting to get sensitive to heat. The
tooth already has a giant old amalgam filling (the tooth is mostly
filling) that looks to me like it's separated, that is, there's like a
grove between the tooth and the filling on one surface. The dentist
found no "nerve involvement" on the x-rays and I felt no pain when he
scratched along the edges of the filling with one of his instruments.
So they are proposing to redo the filling either with amalgam (covered
by insurance) or temperature-resistant (my words) composite (not
covered, a couple hundred) or do a porcelain-fused-to-metal crown
(several hundred), with the option to do a root canal if necessary.
I understand that giving patients options is important because of cost
concerns. But I'm wondering though if there is a scientific reason to
prefer one of these treatments over the others. I was disappointed to
to read that crowns only last several years, that they can be
improperly fitted/placed, that they fall off, etc. If I were to go with
a filling, could the dentist during the process find something that
would make a crown necessary?
In general, which of these treatments works best, on average? I'm 34
and got braces recently.
I'm just looking for some ideas to make an educated decision, granted
that there's only so much info I can provide.
Thanks