| Literature DB >> 32727438 |
Tamea Lacerda Monteiro Medeiros1, Sheila Cristina Almeida Neves Mutran1, Daybelis González Espinosa1, Kelson do Carmo Freitas Faial2, Helder Henrique Costa Pinheiro1, Roberta Souza D'Almeida Couto3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) have shown a significant incidence and prevalence and have been increasingly associated with people's lifestyles and youths. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine the prevalence of NCCLs in footballers and to address potential risk indicators.Entities:
Keywords: Athlete; Dentin; Non-carious cervical lesions; Saliva
Year: 2020 PMID: 32727438 PMCID: PMC7392645 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01200-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Descriptive and bivariate analysis of the questionnaire variables
| Variables | Total (%) | NCCL+ (%) | NCCL- (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education level | 0.638 | |||
| High School | 11 (25.6) | 5 (45.5) | 6 (54.5) | |
| University | 25 (58.1) | 8 (32) | 17 (68) | |
| Postgraduate | 7 (16.3) | 4 (57.1) | 3 (42.9) | |
| Years of a sports activity | 0.834 | |||
| Up to 2 years | 16 (37.2) | 6 (37.5) | 10 (62.5) | |
| More than 2 years | 27 (62.8) | 11 (40.7) | 16 (59.3) | |
| Daily training time | 0.028* | |||
| Up to 1 h | 19 (44.2) | 11 (57.9) | 8 (42.1) | |
| More than 1 h | 24 (55.8) | 6 (25) | 18 (75) | |
| Occupation | 0.293 | |||
| Student | 7 (16.3) | 3 (42.9) | 4 (57.1) | |
| Worker | 18 (41.9) | 8 (44.4) | 10 (55.6) | |
| Student and worker | 13 (30.2) | 6 (46.2) | 7 (53.8) | |
| Without occupation | 5 (11.6) | 0 (0) | 5 (100) | |
| Toothpaste | 0.483 | |||
| Conventional | 34 (79) | 12 (35.3) | 22 (64.7) | |
| Desensitizing | 3 (7) | 2 (66.7) | 1 (33.3) | |
| Whitening | 6 (14) | 3 (50) | 3 (50) | |
| Brushing immediately after meals | 0.383 | |||
| No | 31 (72.1) | 11 (35.5) | 20 (64.5) | |
| Yes | 12 (27.9) | 6 (50) | 6 (50) | |
| Dry mouth | 0.146 | |||
| No | 30 (69.8) | 14 (46.7) | 16 (53.3) | |
| Yes | 13 (30.2) | 3 (23.1) | 10 (76.9) | |
| Gastroesophageal reflux | 0.319 | |||
| No | 38 (88.4) | 14 (36.8) | 24 (63.2) | |
| Yes | 5 (11.6) | 3 (60) | 2 (40) | |
| Medication | 0.149 | |||
| No | 33 (76.8) | 15 (45.5) | 18 (54.5) | |
| Yes | 10 (23.2) | 2 (20) | 8 (80) | |
| Lemon water intake while fasting | 0.128 | |||
| No | 39 (90.7) | 14 (35.9) | 25 (64.1) | |
| Yes | 4 (9.3) | 3 (75) | 1 (25) | |
| Parafunctional habits | 0.642 | |||
| No | 11 (25.6) | 5 (45.5) | 6 (54.5) | |
| Yes | 32 (74.4) | 12 (37.5) | 20 (62.5) | |
| TMJ pain | 0.605 | |||
| No | 31 (72.1) | 13 (41.9) | 18 (58.1) | |
| Yes | 12 (27.9) | 4 (33.3) | 8 (66.7) | |
| Tooth sensitivity | 0.735 | |||
| No | 9 (21) | 4 (44.4) | 5 (55.6) | |
| Yes | 34 (79) | 13 (38.2) | 21 (61.8) | |
| Previous orthodontic treatment | 0.206 | |||
| No | 30 (69.8) | 10 (33.3) | 20 (66.7) | |
| Yes | 13 (30.2) | 7 (53.8) | 6 (46.2) | |
| Malocclusion | 0.763 | |||
| Angle Class I | 35 (81.4) | 14 (40) | 21 (60) | |
| Angle Class II | 4 (9.3) | 1 (25) | 3 (75) | |
| Angle Class III | 4 (9.3) | 2 (50) | 2 (50) | |
| Bite alteration | 0.576 | |||
| No | 25 (58.1) | 9 (36) | 16 (64) | |
| Yes | 18 (41.9) | 8 (44.4) | 10 (55.6) | |
| Total (%) | 43 (100) | 17 (39.5) | 26 (60.5) |
NCCL+: subjects with non-carious cervical lesions. NCCL-: subjects without non-carious cervical lesions. (*) Significant difference (Chi-square test, p < 0.05)
Bivariate and multivariate regression analysis of the questionnaire variables
| Variables | PR (95% CI) | Adjusted PR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Years of a sports activity | ||||
| Up to 2 years | 1.09 (0.5–2.37) | 0.835 | 2.74 (0.97–7.72) | 0.056 |
| More than 2 years | 1 | 1 | ||
| Daily training time | ||||
| Up to 1 h | 2.32 (1.05–5.11) | 0.038* | 3.35 (1.18–9.49) | 0.023* |
| More than 1 h | 1 | 1 | ||
| Toothpaste | ||||
| Whitening | 1.29 (0.49–3) | 0.684 | 1.64 (0.56–4.79) | 0.369 |
| Desensitizing | 1.61 (0.65–4) | 0.304 | 5.26 (1.63–16.96) | 0.004* |
| Conventional | 1 | 1 | ||
| Medication | ||||
| Yes | 0.5 (0.14–1.75) | 0.278 | 0.5 (0.19–1.27) | 0.144 |
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Lemon water intake while fasting | ||||
| Yes | 2.5 (1.67–3.75) | < 0.001* | 8.1 (2.19–29.9) | 0.002* |
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Tooth sensitivity | ||||
| Yes | 0.73 (0.34–1.57) | 0.427 | 2.53 (1.31–4.88) | 0.006* |
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Previous orthodontic treatment | ||||
| Yes | 1.58 (0.77–3) | 0.231 | 3.11 (1.48–6.5) | 0.003* |
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Malocclusion | ||||
| Angle Class III | 1.48 (0.61–3.59) | 0.391 | 0.68 (0.26–1.73) | 0.415 |
| Angle Class II | 0.55 (0.10–3.16) | 0.506 | 0.13 (0.03–0.59) | 0.008* |
| Angle Class I | 1 | 1 | ||
| Bite alteration | ||||
| Yes | 1.1 (0.54–2.22) | 0.795 | 1.53 (0.77–3.07) | 0.226 |
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
PR prevalence ratio, CI confidence interval. (*) Significant difference (Poisson Regression model, p < 0.05)
Frequencies and percentages of the intraoral examination variables
| Teeth | Occlusal wear | VAS tactile (+) | VAS air (+) | NCCLs (+) | TWI | TWI | TWI | Class V restoration | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incisors | 343 (29.4%) | 136 (39.7%) | 72 (21%) | 84 (24.5%) | 4 (1.2%) | 4 (1.2%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (1.2%) |
| Canines | 172 (14.7%) | 50 (29.1%) | 42 (24.4%) | 40 (23.3%) | 12 (7%) | 12 (7%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.3%) |
| Premolars | 331 (28.4%) | 54 (16.3%) | 60 (18.1%) | 70 (21.1%) | 56 (16.9%) | 53 (16%) | 3 (0.9%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Molars | 321 (27.5%) | 35 (10.9%) | 54 (16.8%) | 50 (15.6%) | 22 (6.8%) | 19 (5.9%) | 3 (0.9%) | 0 (0%) | 8 (2%) |
| Upper | 585 (50.1%) | 119 (20.3%) | 103 (17.6%) | 111 (19%) | 51 (8.8%) | 46 (7.9%) | 5 (0.9%) | 0 (0%) | 7 (1.2%) |
| Lower | 582 (49.9%) | 156 (26.8%) | 125 (21.5%) | 133 (22.9%) | 43 (7.4%) | 42 (7.2%) | 1 (0.2%) | 0 (0%) | 6 (1%) |
| Right | 584 (50%) | 140 (24.0%) | 116 (19.9%) | 107 (18.3%) | 58 (9.9%) | 54 (9.2%) | 4 (0.7%) | 0 (0%) | 9 (1.5%) |
| Left | 583 (50%) | 135 (23.1%) | 112 (19.2%) | 137 (23.5%) | 36 (6.1%) | 34 (5.8%) | 2 (0.3%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (0.7%) |
| Total | 1167 (100%) | 275 (23.6%) | 228 (19.5%) | 244 (20.9%) | 94 (8%) | 88 (7.5%) | 6 (0.5%) | 0 (0%) | 13 (1.1%) |
Relationship between occlusal/incisal tooth wear and NCCL depth
| NCCL depth | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | < 1 mm | 1–2 mm | Total | ||
Occlusal/incisal tooth wear | |||||
| 0 | 802 (75.6%) | 73 (83%) | 6 (100%) | 881 (76.3%) | 0.077 |
| 1 | 213 (20.1%) | 15 (17%) | 0 (0%) | 228 (19.7%) | |
| 2 | 41 (3.9%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 41 (3.6%) | |
| 3 | 4 (0.4%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 4 (0.3%) | |
| Total | 1060 (100%) | 88 (100%) | 6 (100%) | 1154 (100%) | |
(*) Significant difference (Chi-square test, p ≤ 0.05)
Fig. 1Clinical appearance of NCCLs. a The upper black arrows indicates wedge-shaped moderate NCCLs (1–2 mm depth) while the lower black arrowhead shows a rounded shallow NCCL (< 1 mm depth). All lesions are located coronally to the CEJ, present supragingival clinical location, absence of sclerotic dentin and smooth texture. b White spots at the cervical teeth outline. The asterisks highlights the white spots (suggestive of cracks) that do not extend to the root in case of gingival recession (black arrowhead)