Mapping of proximal enamel thickness in permanent teeth|
Vellini-Ferreira, Flávio; Cotrim-Ferreira, Flávio Augusto; Ribeiro, José Alaor & Ferreira-Santos, Rívea Inês
Aim: Knowledge of enamel thickness is relevant to perform stripping during orthodontic treatment.
Thus, proximal enamel measurements of human permanent teeth were compared in this study.
Methods: The measurements were previously obtained on cut sections of mandibular central (n
= 30) and lateral (n = 30) incisors, canines (n = 20), first (n = 40) and second (n = 40) premolars;
maxillary central (n = 20) and lateral (n = 20) incisors, canines (n = 20), first (n = 40) and second
(n = 42) premolars. Comparisons between thicknesses by arch side and proximal surface were
carried out using Student's t-tests (a = 0.05). Teeth were compared according to the mesial and
distal thicknesses by ANOVA and Tukey's test.
Results: No significant differences were found
between right and left teeth. For the mesial surface, the mandibular second premolar presented
the highest mean value (1.376 mm ± 0.198; p<0.001). The mandibular central incisor had the
smallest thickness in relation to the other teeth (0.675 mm ± 0.144), although not significant
compared with the mandibular lateral incisor and canine (0.734-0.781 mm). The mandibular
second premolar also presented the higher distal thickness in relation to the others (1.450 mm ±
0.172), although not significant compared with the maxillary first premolar (1.322 mm ± 0.195).
Mandibular incisors had the lowest means for distal thickness (0.872-0.879 mm), although not
statistically different compared with maxillary incisors and mandibular canine (1.002-1.015 mm).
Distal thickness was greater than mesial (p<0.001).
Conclusions: Interproximal stripping should
be less marked in incisors and mesial surfaces.
dental enamel, dentition, permanent, orthodontics, corrective