Cargando…
Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment
Controversial results showing that deciduous teeth are more susceptible to erosion than permanent teeth might be related to study designs. We investigated how different conditions (pH: 3.0, 4.0, 5.0; acid agitation: gentle or vigorous; acid exposure times: 1–5 min) affect the susceptibility of both...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35264778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08116-0 |
_version_ | 1784665575648133120 |
---|---|
author | Carvalho, Thiago Saads Lussi, Adrian Schlueter, Nadine Baumann, Tommy |
author_facet | Carvalho, Thiago Saads Lussi, Adrian Schlueter, Nadine Baumann, Tommy |
author_sort | Carvalho, Thiago Saads |
collection | PubMed |
description | Controversial results showing that deciduous teeth are more susceptible to erosion than permanent teeth might be related to study designs. We investigated how different conditions (pH: 3.0, 4.0, 5.0; acid agitation: gentle or vigorous; acid exposure times: 1–5 min) affect the susceptibility of both teeth to erosion. Enamel specimens (90 deciduous, 90 permanent) were distributed into groups (n = 15 permanent, n = 15 deciduous) according to acid pH (pH 5, 4 or 3) and agitation (gentle or vigorous) during erosive challenge. Both milder (less incubation time, gentle agitation, and higher pH) and more severe (longer incubation times, vigorous shaking, and lower pH) conditions were used. Demineralization was measured by relative surface microhardness (rSMH) and calcium released to the acid. Demineralization increased gradually for both teeth with increasing incubation time, agitation (gentle or vigorous), and with decreasing acid pH. The differences between deciduous and permanent teeth depended on the protocol design and assessment method. Under milder conditions, demineralization was better detectable with rSMH. Under more severe conditions, differences were more perceptible with calcium analyses. Differences exist in the susceptibility to erosion between deciduous and permanent teeth, but they are only distinguishable when the appropriate assessment method is used for the specific erosive condition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8907165 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89071652022-03-10 Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment Carvalho, Thiago Saads Lussi, Adrian Schlueter, Nadine Baumann, Tommy Sci Rep Article Controversial results showing that deciduous teeth are more susceptible to erosion than permanent teeth might be related to study designs. We investigated how different conditions (pH: 3.0, 4.0, 5.0; acid agitation: gentle or vigorous; acid exposure times: 1–5 min) affect the susceptibility of both teeth to erosion. Enamel specimens (90 deciduous, 90 permanent) were distributed into groups (n = 15 permanent, n = 15 deciduous) according to acid pH (pH 5, 4 or 3) and agitation (gentle or vigorous) during erosive challenge. Both milder (less incubation time, gentle agitation, and higher pH) and more severe (longer incubation times, vigorous shaking, and lower pH) conditions were used. Demineralization was measured by relative surface microhardness (rSMH) and calcium released to the acid. Demineralization increased gradually for both teeth with increasing incubation time, agitation (gentle or vigorous), and with decreasing acid pH. The differences between deciduous and permanent teeth depended on the protocol design and assessment method. Under milder conditions, demineralization was better detectable with rSMH. Under more severe conditions, differences were more perceptible with calcium analyses. Differences exist in the susceptibility to erosion between deciduous and permanent teeth, but they are only distinguishable when the appropriate assessment method is used for the specific erosive condition. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-03-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8907165/ /pubmed/35264778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08116-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Carvalho, Thiago Saads Lussi, Adrian Schlueter, Nadine Baumann, Tommy Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title | Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title_full | Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title_fullStr | Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title_short | Differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
title_sort | differences in susceptibility of deciduous and permanent teeth to erosion exist, albeit depending on protocol design and method of assessment |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907165/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35264778 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08116-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT carvalhothiagosaads differencesinsusceptibilityofdeciduousandpermanentteethtoerosionexistalbeitdependingonprotocoldesignandmethodofassessment AT lussiadrian differencesinsusceptibilityofdeciduousandpermanentteethtoerosionexistalbeitdependingonprotocoldesignandmethodofassessment AT schlueternadine differencesinsusceptibilityofdeciduousandpermanentteethtoerosionexistalbeitdependingonprotocoldesignandmethodofassessment AT baumanntommy differencesinsusceptibilityofdeciduousandpermanentteethtoerosionexistalbeitdependingonprotocoldesignandmethodofassessment |