Mechanical properties of human oral mucosa tissues are site dependent: A combined biomechanical, histological and ultrastructural approach.
Biomechanics
Elastic modulus
Oral mucosa
Tensile strength
Thiel-embalming
Journal
Clinical and experimental dental research
ISSN: 2057-4347
Titre abrégé: Clin Exp Dent Res
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101692332
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
29
02
2020
revised:
16
05
2020
accepted:
18
05
2020
pubmed:
4
7
2020
medline:
3
11
2021
entrez:
4
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To investigate load-deformation properties of Thiel-embalmed human oral mucosa tissues and to compare three different anatomical regions in terms of mechanical, histological and ultrastructural characteristic with focus on the extracellular matrix. Thirty specimens from three different regions of the oral cavity: attached gingiva, buccal mucosa and the hard palate were harvested from two Thiel-embalmed cadavers. Mechanical properties were obtained, combining strain evaluation and digital image correlation in a standardised approach. Elastic modulus, tensile strength, strain at maximum load and strain to failure were computed and analysed statistically. Subsamples were also analysed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and histological analysis. The highest elastic modulus of 37.36 ± 17.4 MPa was found in the attached gingiva group, followed by the hard palate and buccal mucosa. The elastic moduli of attached gingiva differed significantly to the buccal mucosa (p = .01) and hard palate (p = .021). However, there was no difference in the elastic moduli between the buccal mucosa and hard palate (p > .22). The tensile strength of the tissue samples ranged from 1.54 ± 0.5MPa to 3.81 ± 0.9 MPa, with a significant difference between gingiva group and buccal mucosa or hard palate (p = .001). No difference was found in the mean tensile strength between the buccal mucosa and hard palate (p = .92). Ultrastructural imaging yielded a morphological basis for the various mechanical properties found intraorally; the attached gingiva showed unidirectional collagen fibre network whereas the buccal mucosa and hard palate showed multi-directional network, which was more prone to tension failure and less elasticity. This is the first study assessing the various morphological-mechanical relationships of intraoral soft tissues, utilising Thiel-embalmed tissues. The findings of this study suggest that the tissues from different intraoral regions showed various morphological-mechanical behaviour which was also confirmed under the SEM and in the histological analysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32618130
doi: 10.1002/cre2.305
pmc: PMC7745080
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
602-611Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Ann Anat. 1992 Jun;174(3):185-95
pubmed: 1503236
J Prosthet Dent. 1986 Nov;56(5):574-82
pubmed: 2430097
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 May;20(5):521-5
pubmed: 19522977
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2020 Dec;6(6):602-611
pubmed: 32618130
Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 1999 May;40(2):61-9
pubmed: 10825816
Clin Anat. 2019 Oct;32(7):903-913
pubmed: 31112307
Acta Orthop Scand. 1966;37(2):141-55
pubmed: 5911489
J Orofac Pain. 1995 Winter;9(1):44-50
pubmed: 7581204
J Prosthet Dent. 1967 Aug;18(2):116-21
pubmed: 5339734
J Periodontol. 2011 Aug;82(8):1178-86
pubmed: 21309720
Int J Prosthodont. 2005 Mar-Apr;18(2):124-31
pubmed: 15889660
Protet Stomatol. 1970;20(3):171-6
pubmed: 4918394
J Prosthet Dent. 1978 Sep;40(3):263-72
pubmed: 100600
Br Dent J. 1968 Jan 2;124(1):22-7
pubmed: 5235231
Connect Tissue Res. 2009;50(4):211-22
pubmed: 19637057
Clin Anat. 2008 Jan;21(1):75-81
pubmed: 18058900
J Prosthet Dent. 1982 Mar;47(3):317-29
pubmed: 7038105
J Morphol. 1967 Jun;122(2):89-114
pubmed: 6040566
J Dent Res. 1981 Jul;60(7):1301-10
pubmed: 7016944
J Oral Rehabil. 2007 Nov;34(11):862-9
pubmed: 17919254
Sci Rep. 2018 Jul 27;8(1):11340
pubmed: 30054509
J Oral Rehabil. 2004 Sep;31(9):873-8
pubmed: 15369468
J Prosthodont Res. 2013 Oct;57(4):275-83
pubmed: 24064033
J Periodontal Res. 2000 Dec;35(6):361-8
pubmed: 11144409
Clin Anat. 2006 Jan;19(1):8-11
pubmed: 16287109
Front Physiol. 2016 Aug 29;7:364
pubmed: 27621708
J R Soc Interface. 2015 Aug 6;12(109):20150325
pubmed: 26224566
Implant Dent. 2011 Jun;20(3):192-201
pubmed: 21613946
Sci Rep. 2019 Nov 13;9(1):16655
pubmed: 31723169
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011 Apr;4(3):269-74
pubmed: 21316614
Dent Mater J. 1985 Jun;4(1):47-53
pubmed: 3879991
J Prosthet Dent. 2004 Oct;92(4):309-15
pubmed: 15507901
Anat Sci Educ. 2015 Jan-Feb;8(1):74-85
pubmed: 24706536
Int J Prosthodont. 1994 Jul-Aug;7(4):339-47
pubmed: 7993545