Here's the deal:
My wife just went to her dentist here, about 3 weeks ago. She had 2
teeth that were sensitive and so she asked him about them. He said one
needed 2 fillings, which he did.

Right away after that, the tooth he worked on still bothered her, as
did the other one, so she went back.

He looked at them and said they were fine, no problems. Said she
needed a crown on one but that it could wait.

So, we decided to send her to Mexico to have her sister do the crown.
Her sister is a new dentist but said she could do it, so we decided to
give her a try. She has done a few other things for my wife but
nothing as major as a crown. But she wanted to visit her family and I
said, fine, the cheaper dental work will pay for the trip down there,
and at least we know her sister will do her best to do it right.

So anyway, she gets down there and her sister says that she has a
major infection in that tooth that the dentist said there was no
problem with.

What I want to know, is Shouldn't the dentist have seen that
infection? Or is it possible that the infection was only visible 3
weeks later? Seems to me the infection was probably there already, as
she had been having bad breath that made us both suspect a problem,
and the fact that the tooth was bothering her. Yet the dentist said
there was no problem, nothing to worry about for now, just get the
crown when we can.

I just want to know if this dentist who told us everything was fine,
is competent, or if he should probably have seen it. I know that as
fellow dentists you would caution on the side of giving the dentist
the benefit of the doubt, but I smell incompetence. What is the chance
that the dentist should have noticed the infection but did not? I am
thinking of calling him on it when she gets back. She will bring the
xrays and dental records from her sister, with her.

Here's the deal:
My wife just went to her dentist here, about 3 weeks ago. She had 2
teeth that were sensitive and so she asked him about them. He said one
needed 2 fillings, which he did.

Right away after that, the tooth he worked on still bothered her, as
did the other one, so she went back.

He looked at them and said they were fine, no problems. Said she
needed a crown on one but that it could wait.

So, we decided to send her to Mexico to have her sister do the crown.
Her sister is a new dentist but said she could do it, so we decided to
give her a try. She has done a few other things for my wife but
nothing as major as a crown. But she wanted to visit her family and I
said, fine, the cheaper dental work will pay for the trip down there,
and at least we know her sister will do her best to do it right.

So anyway, she gets down there and her sister says that she has a
major infection in that tooth that the dentist said there was no
problem with.

What I want to know, is Shouldn't the dentist have seen that
infection? Or is it possible that the infection was only visible 3
weeks later? Seems to me the infection was probably there already, as
she had been having bad breath that made us both suspect a problem,
and the fact that the tooth was bothering her. Yet the dentist said
there was no problem, nothing to worry about for now, just get the
crown when we can.

I just want to know if this dentist who told us everything was fine,
is competent, or if he should probably have seen it. I know that as
fellow dentists you would caution on the side of giving the dentist
the benefit of the doubt, but I smell incompetence. What is the chance
that the dentist should have noticed the infection but did not? I am
thinking of calling him on it when she gets back. She will bring the
xrays and dental records from her sister, with her.

Whenever a tooth is drilled on to remove old cavity, decay, etc...
there is a risk of the pulp dying and turning into future infection. We
try to avoid preventative root canals as this can be over-treatment.
and there is no way of clearly knowing whether a tooth will end up
having an infection or not. Perhaps it was a good idea to wait a while
for the crown to see if the tooth recovered or not. Either way if the
pulp was going to die it would have anyway regardless of who did the
filling. It takes time to know whether there is true infection or post
op sensitivity in hard tissues such as teeth. One can not see infection
on an x-rays, only signs of existing infection after it has been there
for a while and caused the surrounding bone to remodel. Sometimes it
can take months for the infection to show up. Its a process of
elimination and unless you want your dentist to gamble with the health
of your teeth, it unfortunately takes time to get to the root of the
problem.


JimSocal wrote:
Here's the deal:
My wife just went to her dentist here, about 3 weeks ago. She had 2
teeth that were sensitive and so she asked him about them. He said one
needed 2 fillings, which he did.

Right away after that, the tooth he worked on still bothered her, as
did the other one, so she went back.

He looked at them and said they were fine, no problems. Said she
needed a crown on one but that it could wait.

So, we decided to send her to Mexico to have her sister do the crown.
Her sister is a new dentist but said she could do it, so we decided to
give her a try. She has done a few other things for my wife but
nothing as major as a crown. But she wanted to visit her family and I
said, fine, the cheaper dental work will pay for the trip down there,
and at least we know her sister will do her best to do it right.

So anyway, she gets down there and her sister says that she has a
major infection in that tooth that the dentist said there was no
problem with.

What I want to know, is Shouldn't the dentist have seen that
infection? Or is it possible that the infection was only visible 3
weeks later? Seems to me the infection was probably there already, as
she had been having bad breath that made us both suspect a problem,
and the fact that the tooth was bothering her. Yet the dentist said
there was no problem, nothing to worry about for now, just get the
crown when we can.

I just want to know if this dentist who told us everything was fine,
is competent, or if he should probably have seen it. I know that as
fellow dentists you would caution on the side of giving the dentist
the benefit of the doubt, but I smell incompetence. What is the chance
that the dentist should have noticed the infection but did not? I am
thinking of calling him on it when she gets back. She will bring the
xrays and dental records from her sister, with her.