Hui-Ling Chen1, Jason Chen-Chieh Fang2, Chia-Jung Chang1, Ti-Feng Wu1, I-Kuan Wang3,4, Jen-Fen Fu5,6, Ya-Ching Huang7,8, Ju-Shao Yen9, Cheng-Hao Weng9, Tzung-Hai Yen9,10,11. 1. Department of Dentistry and Craniofacial Orthodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan. 2. School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung 402, Taiwan. 3. Department of Nephrology, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung 404, Taiwan. 4. College of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung 406, Taiwan. 5. Department of Medical Research, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan. 6. Graduate Institute of Clinical Medical Sciences, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan. 7. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan. 8. Department of Medical Biotechnology and Laboratory Science, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan. 9. Department of Nephrology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan. 10. Clinical Poison Center, Kidney Research Center, Center for Tissue Engineering, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou 333, Taiwan. 11. College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that environmental cadmium exposure could disrupt salivary gland function and is associated with dental caries and reduced bone density. Therefore, this cross-sectional study attempted to determine whether tooth decay with tooth loss following cadmium exposure is associated with some dental or skeletal traits such as malocclusions, sagittal skeletal pattern, and tooth decay. METHODS: Between August 2019 and June 2020, 60 orthodontic patients with no history of previous orthodontics, functional appliances, or surgical treatment were examined. The patients were stratified into two groups according to their urine cadmium concentrations: high (>1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 28) or low (<1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 32). RESULTS: The patients were 25.07 ± 4.33 years old, and most were female (female/male: 51/9 or 85%). The skeletal relationship was mainly Class I (48.3%), followed by Class II (35.0%) and Class III (16.7%). Class I molar relationships were found in 46.7% of these patients, Class II molar relationships were found in 15%, and Class III molar relationships were found in 38.3%. The mean decayed, missing, and filled surface (DMFS) score was 8.05 ± 5.54, including 2.03 ± 3.11 for the decayed index, 0.58 ± 1.17 for the missing index, and 5.52 ± 3.92 for the filled index. The mean index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) score was 53.35 ± 9.01. The facial patterns of these patients were within the average low margin (26.65 ± 5.53 for Frankfort-mandibular plane angle (FMA)). There were no significant differences in the above-mentioned dental indices between patients with high urine cadmium concentrations and those with low urine cadmium concentrations. Patients were further stratified into low (<27, n = 34), average (27-34, n = 23), and high (>34, n = 3) FMA groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the urine cadmium concentration among the three groups. Nevertheless, a marginally significant p-value of 0.05 for urine cadmium concentration was noted between patients with low FMA and patients with high FMA. CONCLUSION: This analysis found no association between environmental cadmium exposure and dental indices in our orthodontic patients.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that environmental cadmium exposure could disrupt salivary gland function and is associated with dental caries and reduced bone density. Therefore, this cross-sectional study attempted to determine whether tooth decay with tooth loss following cadmium exposure is associated with some dental or skeletal traits such as malocclusions, sagittal skeletal pattern, and tooth decay. METHODS: Between August 2019 and June 2020, 60 orthodontic patients with no history of previous orthodontics, functional appliances, or surgical treatment were examined. The patients were stratified into two groups according to their urine cadmium concentrations: high (>1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 28) or low (<1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 32). RESULTS: The patients were 25.07 ± 4.33 years old, and most were female (female/male: 51/9 or 85%). The skeletal relationship was mainly Class I (48.3%), followed by Class II (35.0%) and Class III (16.7%). Class I molar relationships were found in 46.7% of these patients, Class II molar relationships were found in 15%, and Class III molar relationships were found in 38.3%. The mean decayed, missing, and filled surface (DMFS) score was 8.05 ± 5.54, including 2.03 ± 3.11 for the decayed index, 0.58 ± 1.17 for the missing index, and 5.52 ± 3.92 for the filled index. The mean index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) score was 53.35 ± 9.01. The facial patterns of these patients were within the average low margin (26.65 ± 5.53 for Frankfort-mandibular plane angle (FMA)). There were no significant differences in the above-mentioned dental indices between patients with high urine cadmium concentrations and those with low urine cadmium concentrations. Patients were further stratified into low (<27, n = 34), average (27-34, n = 23), and high (>34, n = 3) FMA groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the urine cadmium concentration among the three groups. Nevertheless, a marginally significant p-value of 0.05 for urine cadmium concentration was noted between patients with low FMA and patients with high FMA. CONCLUSION: This analysis found no association between environmental cadmium exposure and dental indices in our orthodontic patients.
Authors: Jun Yan; Honglong Zhang; Zenan Hu; Xuan Zhang; Jingping Niu; Bin Luo; Haiping Wang; Xun Li Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-11 Impact factor: 4.614