| Literature DB >> 35455604 |
Mohammed Nadeem Bijle1,2, Sreekanth Kumar Mallineni3,4, James Tsoi5.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to characterize natal and neonatal teeth using micro-computed tomography. A total of 4 natal and 11 neonatal teeth were used for the analysis. The reconstructed scans were assessed for the maximum enamel/dentin thickness and mineral density (MD). The scanned specimens were 3D reconstructed to qualitatively determine the surface topography. The dentin thickness was two-fold greater than enamel thickness for both natal and neonatal teeth (p < 0.05). The cervical third enamel MD remained undetermined in natal and neonatal teeth. The dentin MD at the cervical third for neonatal teeth was significantly lower than the incisal and middle third dentin (p < 0.05). Similarly, the dentin MD at the cervical third of neonatal teeth was significantly lower than the cervical third dentin MD of natal teeth (p < 0.05). Our qualitative analysis suggests that the cervical thirds of both natal and neonatal teeth are peculiar of an anomalous structure, with neonatal teeth showing an irregular outline. Under the conditions of the present study, it can be concluded that the neonatal teeth studied exhibited a distinguishable aberrant structure compared to the natal teeth. Therefore, the natal teeth unfold as a more organized, three-dimensional structure compared to the neonatal teeth.Entities:
Keywords: infants; micro-computed tomography; mineral density; natal teeth; neonatal teeth
Year: 2022 PMID: 35455604 PMCID: PMC9024662 DOI: 10.3390/children9040560
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Children (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9067
Maximum enamel and dentin thicknesses (in mm) in natal/neonatal teeth.
| Thickness (in mm) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Teeth | Enamel | Dentin | |
| Natal ( | 0.26 ± 0.07 a | 0.50 ± 0.06 b | 0.002 |
| Neonatal ( | 0.31 ± 0.04 A | 0.48 ± 0.08 B | <0.001 |
No significant difference was observed between natal and neonatal teeth for maximum enamel/dentin thickness (p > 0.05). Uppercase and lowercase English letters represent significant differences between enamel and dentin maximum thicknesses for natal and neonatal teeth.
Enamel mineral density (in g/cm3) at incisal, middle, and cervical thirds of natal/neonatal teeth.
| Enamel Mineral Density (Mean ± SD) in g/cm3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Teeth | Incisal 1/3rd | Middle 1/3rd | Cervical 1/3rd |
| Natal ( | 1.79 ± 0.27 a,1 | 1.71 ± 0.20 a,I | Undetermined b,α |
| Neonatal ( | 1.71 ± 0.17 A,1 | 1.53 ± 0.18 A,I | Undetermined B,α |
Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s post hoc test at all levels was applied. Factor 1—natal/neonatal teeth (p = 0.190); Factor 2—incisal/middle/cervical third of the tooth (p < 0.001); Factor interaction (p = 0.926). Lower (a,b)/uppercase (A,B) letters indicate differences within each row. (1), (I), and (α) show differences within each column.
Dentin mineral density (in g/cm3) at incisal, middle, and cervical thirds of natal/neonatal teeth.
| Dentin Mineral Density (Mean ± SD) in g/cm3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tooth Type | Incisal 1/3rd | Middle 1/3rd | Cervical 1/3rd |
| Natal ( | 1.25 ± 0.14 a,1 | 1.21 ± 0.12 a,I | 1.09 ± 0.13 a,α |
| Neonatal ( | 1.23 ± 0.12 A,1 | 1.12 ± 0.11 A,I | 0.95 ± 0.12 B,β |
Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s post hoc test at all levels was applied. Factor 1—natal/neonatal teeth (p = 0.047; natal > neonatal); Factor 2—incisal/middle/cervical third of the tooth (p < 0.001); Factor interaction (p = 0.468). Lower(a)/uppercase (A,B) letters demonstrate differences within each row. (1), (I), and (α,β) show differences within each column.
Figure 1Representative 3D reconstructed natal tooth. (A) buccal view; (B) palatal view; (C,D) proximal views.
Figure 2Representative 3D reconstructed neonatal tooth. (A) buccal view; (B) palatal view; (C,D) proximal views.