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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carvalho, Thiago Saads, Lussi, Adrian, Schlueter, Nadine, Baumann, Tommy
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