• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: DENTSPLY CAULK FLUOROCORE 2+

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

DENTSPLY CAULK FLUOROCORE 2+ Back to Search Results
Catalog Number 612402
Device Problem Failure To Adhere Or Bond (1031)
Patient Problem Tooth Fracture (2428)
Event Type  Injury  
Event Description
In this event it was reported that in 2010 several crowns had debonded causing fractures in teeth after cementation with fluorocore 2 cement.The fractured crowns and teeth were alleged to exhibit a mushy appearance inside.
 
Manufacturer Narrative
While it is certainly possible that the patient experienced this resulting from unset cement there potentially could be other contributing factors to teeth requiring root canal therapy after crowns are placed.It is not an uncommon occurrence that a tooth that has received a crown preparation later required root canal therapy.Often enough, the trauma from preparation of the tooth to receive the crown can cause necrosis of the nerve.In addition there is no mention of how long the patient wore provisional restorations.As provisional restoration worn over long periods of time lack the marginal integrity and seal of permanent crowns the teeth may have been traumatized from this as well.Finally, over-preparation of several of the teeth to get them in line to receive esthetically pleasing restorations could cause nerve necrosis mandating rct.As there is no way to examine the preparations, the integrity and fit of the permanent crowns or the occlusion developed by the practicing dentist we must consider that the cement may have contributed to the final outcome.While in might be argued that other factors may have contributed to the problem it is impossible to ascertain whether the failures were caused by the cement alone or at all.Without additional supporting information we cannot conclude that there was a malfunction.Nevertheless, because intervention was required, this event meets the criteria for reportability per 21 cfr part 803.The device was not returned for evaluation and the lot number was not provided for retained-product testing and/or dhr review.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
FLUOROCORE 2+
Manufacturer (Section D)
DENTSPLY CAULK
milford DE
Manufacturer (Section G)
DENTSPLY CAULK
38 west clarke ave.
milford DE 19963
Manufacturer Contact
helen lewis
221 w. philadelphia st., ste. 60
susquehanna commerce center w.
york, PA 17401
7178457511
MDR Report Key3625018
MDR Text Key4204853
Report Number2515379-2014-00004
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code EBF
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeUS
PMA/PMN Number
K083326
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type Health Professional
Reporter Occupation Dentist
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 01/02/2014
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received01/30/2014
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? Yes
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Catalogue Number612402
Was Device Available for Evaluation? No
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received01/02/2014
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Device Not Returned to Manufacturer
Is the Device Single Use? Yes
Is This a Reprocessed and Reused Single-Use Device? No
Type of Device Usage Unknown
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Required Intervention;
-
-