Age and sex related change in tooth enamel thickness of maxillary incisors measured by cone beam computed tomography.
Age
CBCT
Enamel thickness
Sex
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Dec 2023
06 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
07
04
2023
accepted:
08
11
2023
medline:
11
12
2023
pubmed:
7
12
2023
entrez:
7
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To measure adequate enamel thickness of maxillary incisors in planning enamel reduction for a porcelain laminate veneer restoration in relation to chronological age and sex by using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in an Iraqi subpopulation. From 81 CBCT images, 324 maxillary incisors were examined. Enamel thickness was measured at both mesial and distal regions of the tooth in three different levels: cervical, middle, and incisal (occlusal) 1/3 at a sagittal section. Measurements were made for the following tooth areas using CBCT: facial enamel thickness at 1, 3, and 5 mm from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), palatal enamel thickness at 5 mm from the CEJ (5 mm P), facial and palatal enamel thickness at the incisal edge (IFP), mid incisal enamel thickness (IET), and the incisal edge enamel-pulp distance (IEPD). Relationships of enamel thickness with age and sex were evaluated using Independent t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test and the Pearson correlation coefficient, a simple linear regression analysis used for statistical analysis. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found in terms of an inverse association between enamel thickness and chronological age at all measurements above the CEJ and the regression model for the mid-incisal enamel thickness was (R2 of 0.4). In contrast, there was an increase in IFP, palatal, and IPED enamel thickness with age. Also, significant differences were found in enamel thickness between males and females, the enamel being thicker in females in relation to facial enamel thickness, enamel palatal thickness above CEJ and IET, while for IEPD, the enamel thickness was greater in males compared to females. The measurements for enamel thickness outcome variables in relation to chronological age revealed significant differences for each measured distance and there were statistically significant differences in enamel thickness between males and females at all measurements except at IFP. These results demonstrate that CBCT can be used for noninvasive, accurate measurements of enamel thickness in both sex.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To measure adequate enamel thickness of maxillary incisors in planning enamel reduction for a porcelain laminate veneer restoration in relation to chronological age and sex by using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in an Iraqi subpopulation.
METHODS
METHODS
From 81 CBCT images, 324 maxillary incisors were examined. Enamel thickness was measured at both mesial and distal regions of the tooth in three different levels: cervical, middle, and incisal (occlusal) 1/3 at a sagittal section. Measurements were made for the following tooth areas using CBCT: facial enamel thickness at 1, 3, and 5 mm from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), palatal enamel thickness at 5 mm from the CEJ (5 mm P), facial and palatal enamel thickness at the incisal edge (IFP), mid incisal enamel thickness (IET), and the incisal edge enamel-pulp distance (IEPD). Relationships of enamel thickness with age and sex were evaluated using Independent t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test and the Pearson correlation coefficient, a simple linear regression analysis used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Significant differences (P < 0.05) were found in terms of an inverse association between enamel thickness and chronological age at all measurements above the CEJ and the regression model for the mid-incisal enamel thickness was (R2 of 0.4). In contrast, there was an increase in IFP, palatal, and IPED enamel thickness with age. Also, significant differences were found in enamel thickness between males and females, the enamel being thicker in females in relation to facial enamel thickness, enamel palatal thickness above CEJ and IET, while for IEPD, the enamel thickness was greater in males compared to females.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The measurements for enamel thickness outcome variables in relation to chronological age revealed significant differences for each measured distance and there were statistically significant differences in enamel thickness between males and females at all measurements except at IFP. These results demonstrate that CBCT can be used for noninvasive, accurate measurements of enamel thickness in both sex.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38057794
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03639-y
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-03639-y
pmc: PMC10701974
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dental Materials
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
971Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Nov;137(11):1555-61
pubmed: 17082282
Compendium. 1991 May;12(5):316, 318, 320 passim
pubmed: 1933982
J Prosthet Dent. 2003 Jun;89(6):544-50
pubmed: 12815347
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Oct;94(4):336-41
pubmed: 16198170
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2012 Aug;24(4):257-65
pubmed: 22863131
Int J Oral Sci. 2019 Oct 2;11(3):31
pubmed: 31575850
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020 Sep;158(3):391-399
pubmed: 32653347
Br Dent J. 2002 Apr 13;192(7):401-4; discussion 392
pubmed: 12017460
Arch Oral Biol. 2002 Apr;47(4):281-91
pubmed: 11922871
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 May;111(5):380-7
pubmed: 24439106
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jul;136(1):19-25; discussion 25-8
pubmed: 19577143
Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol. 2006 Mar;288(3):263-75
pubmed: 16463379
Biomed Res Int. 2022 Jul 11;2022:7825948
pubmed: 35860794
J Dent. 2016 Aug;51:36-44
pubmed: 27265619
J Dent (Tehran). 2014 Jul;11(4):428-32
pubmed: 25584054
BMC Oral Health. 2022 Jan 7;22(1):3
pubmed: 34996438
J Prosthodont. 2007 Nov-Dec;16(6):457-64
pubmed: 17672830
J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2000 Dec;18(2):22-6
pubmed: 11324266
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011 Nov;14(4):206-12
pubmed: 22008300
J Forensic Dent Sci. 2015 May-Aug;7(2):158-62
pubmed: 26005307
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1992;12(5):407-13
pubmed: 1343012
Br Dent J. 2000 Sep 9;189(5):260-2
pubmed: 11048393
Arch Oral Biol. 2001 Dec;46(12):1117-25
pubmed: 11684031
Dent Update. 1991 Apr;18(3):112-6
pubmed: 2103907
J Prosthet Dent. 1977 May;37(5):537-46
pubmed: 265407