Tin Foil and Its Combinations for Filling Teeth

by Henry Lovejoy Ambler

Dr. W. D. Miller: "I use tin foil in cylinders, strips, and ropes, on the non-cohesive plan, but admit that it possesses a slight degree of cohesiveness, and when necessary can be built up like cohesive gold by using deeply serrated pluggers."

Dr. Benjamin Lord says, "It is said that we know the world, or learn the world, by comparison. If we compare tin foil with gold foil, we find that the tin, being softer, works more kindly, and can be more readily and with more certainty adapted to the walls, the inequalities, and the corners of the cavities.

"We find also that tin welds—mechanically, of course—more surely than soft gold, owing to its greater softness; the folds can be interlaced or forced into each other, and united with more certainty, and with so much security that, after the packing and condensing are finished, the mass may be cut like molten metal.

"I contend moreover that for contouring the filling or restoring the natural shape of the teeth, where there are three walls remaining to the cavity, tin is fully equal to gold, and in some respects even superior; as tin can be secured, where there is very little to hold or retain the filling, better than gold, owing to the ease and greater certainty of its adaptation to the retaining points or edges of the cavity.

"It will be said, however, that tin fillings will wear away. The surfaces that are exposed to mastication undoubtedly will wear in time; but the filling does not become leaky if it has been properly packed and condensed, nor will the margins of the cavity be attacked by further decay on that account.

"Altogether, I believe that we can make more perfect fillings with tin than we can with gold, taking all classes of cavities; but it must not be understood that it is proposed that tin should ever take the place of gold where the circumstances and conditions indicate that the latter should be used. Of course, the virtue is not in the gold or the tin, but in the mechanical perfection of the operation, and tin having more plasticity than gold, that perfection can be secured with more ease and certainty.

"If we compare tin with amalgam, we must certainly decide in favor of the former and give it preference; as if it is packed and condensed as perfectly as may be, we know just what such fillings will do every time. We know that there will be no changes or leakage of the fillings at the margins; whereas, with amalgam, the rule is shrinkage of the mass, and consequently the admission of moisture around the filling, the result being further decay. It is not contended that this is always the result with amalgam, but it is the general rule; yet we must use amalgam, as there are not a few cases where it is the best that we can do; but it is to be hoped, and I think it may be said, that as manipulative skill advances, amalgam will be less and less used. For so-called temporary work, very often I prefer tin to gutta-percha, as it makes a much more reliable edge and lasts longer, even when placed and packed without great care."—N. Y. Odon. Society Proceedings, page 51, 1894.

One of the main reasons which induced the writer to begin the use of tin foil (Stannum Foliatum) for filling teeth, in 1867, was the fact that amalgam filling failures were being presented daily. Believing that tin could do no worse, but probably would do better, we banished amalgam from the office for the succeeding seven years, using in the place of it tin, oxychlorid, and gutta-percha. Since that time we have seen no good reason for abandoning the use of tin, as time has proved it worthy of great confidence. There is no better dental litmus to distinguish the conservative from the progressive dentist.

If we take a retrospective view and consider what tin foil was thirty years ago, we do not wonder that so many operators failed to make tight, good-wearing fillings. As it came from the manufacturer it looked fairly bright, but after being exposed to the air for a short time it assumed a light brassy color, and lost what small amount of integrity it originally possessed. This tin was not properly refined before beating, or something was put on the foil while beating, so that it did not have the clean, bright surface and cohesive quality which our best foil now has. No. 4 was commonly used, but it would cut and crumble in the most provoking manner. Fillings were made by using mats, cylinders, tapes, and ropes, with hand-pressure, on the plan for manipulating non-cohesive gold foil, but it was difficult to insert a respectable approximal filling.

From the best information obtainable, the writer believes that Marcus Bull (the predecessor of Abbey) was the first to manufacture and sell tin foil in the United States, as he began the manufacture of gold foil at Hartford in 1812.