Evaluating the prospective crown-root ratio after extrusion and crown lengthening procedures in vitro.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 11 2023
02 11 2023
Historique:
received:
16
06
2023
accepted:
31
10
2023
medline:
6
11
2023
pubmed:
3
11
2023
entrez:
3
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
For restoration of extensively damaged teeth preprosthetic treatment measures are necessary. Crown lengthening and extrusion affect the prospective crown-root ratio (CRR). The subject of this in vitro study was to compute CRRs for both treatment approaches. 120 human maxillary central extracted incisors were measured. Measurements were calculated for five treatment groups: C (control), E-2 mm (extrusion of 2 mm), E-4 mm (extrusion of 4 mm), CL-2 mm (crown lengthening of 2 mm), and CL-4 mm (crown lengthening of 4 mm). Tooth (TL), root (RL), and crown lengths (CL) were measured from mesial (m) and facial (f) cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), and respective anatomic (CRR) and effective crown-root ratios (eCRR) were calculated. Following CRR values were computed for C: CRR-m = 0.4 ± 0.1, CRR-f = 0.7 ± 0.1. All crown-root ratios were lower (more favourable) for extrusion compared to crown lengthening (p < 0.001). ECRRs were higher than anatomic CRRs. CRR at mesial CEJ was significantly lower than CRR with facial CEJ as reference (p < 0.001). Mesial measurement-based calculations of CRR typically based on radiographic images should be interpreted with caution as they underestimate the eCRR. CRR can be expected as lower, i.e. more favourable, when teeth are extruded than crown lengthened.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37919362
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-46354-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-46354-y
pmc: PMC10622524
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
18899Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Jun;93(6):559-62
pubmed: 15942617
J Clin Periodontol. 2001 Jan;28(1):57-64
pubmed: 11142668
J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Aug;84(2):169-79
pubmed: 10946334
Int J Prosthodont. 2004 Mar-Apr;17(2):135-41
pubmed: 15119862
J Prosthet Dent. 1991 Jan;65(1):62-4
pubmed: 2033546
J Endod. 2018 Feb;44(2):212-219
pubmed: 29229457
J Periodontol. 2003 Apr;74(4):468-74
pubmed: 12747451
J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Jan;129(1):61-68
pubmed: 36535882
Periodontol 2000. 1994 Feb;4:15-22
pubmed: 9673190
J Periodontol. 1976 Apr;47(4):203-16
pubmed: 1063857
Oper Dent. 2007 Nov-Dec;32(6):595-601
pubmed: 18051010
J Periodontol. 1996 Jul;67(7):658-65
pubmed: 8832476
J Prosthet Dent. 1968 May;19(5):483-8
pubmed: 5239510
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23 Suppl 5:1-21
pubmed: 22211303
Periodontol 2000. 2017 Feb;73(1):84-102
pubmed: 28000278
J Prosthet Dent. 1980 Apr;43(4):401-7
pubmed: 6928478
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Nov 29;18(23):
pubmed: 34886307
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1973 Sep;36(3):404-15
pubmed: 4516470
J Clin Periodontol. 1997 Aug;24(8):557-67
pubmed: 9266343
J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Dec;120(6):879-885
pubmed: 29960724
J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Oct;98(4):285-311
pubmed: 17936128
Quintessence Int. 2007 Mar;38(3):179-91
pubmed: 17333995
J Dent Res. 2015 Sep;94(9 Suppl):220S-5S
pubmed: 26056056
J Prosthet Dent. 1985 May;53(5):631-6
pubmed: 3889302
J Dent Res. 2016 Jan;95(1):43-9
pubmed: 26701919
Int Endod J. 2009 Oct;42(10):874-83
pubmed: 19751289
Am J Dent. 2009 Jun;22(3):147-50
pubmed: 19650594
J Endod. 2019 Jun;45(6):696-700
pubmed: 31005334