Do the levels of selected metals differ significantly between the roots of carious and non-carious teeth?

Blood Levels of the Heavy Metal, Lead, and Caries in Children Aged 24-72 Months: NHANES III

“…The studies involving lead and dental caries have had equivocal results [Moss et al, 1999 supporting the relationship; Campbell et al, 2000 not demonstrating an exposure >10 μg/dL as a toddler being a predictor of dental caries in school-aged children; Martin et al, 2007 supporting a weak male only association of lead exposure and primary teeth caries; and Malara, et al, 2006 not finding a significant difference in lead concentration and the roots of carious/non-carious permanent teeth]. Study designs were significantly different: lead levels were determined using log transformed lead levels, or lead levels dichotomized at 5 μg/dL or 10 μg/dL; participants had different age categories in the different studies; caries was evaluated on permanent/mixed/primary dentitions; and caries prevalence as decayed and filled primary teeth, dft, (presence/absence) was used as an outcome [Moss et al, 1999; Campbell et al, 2000; Martin et al, 2007].…”

Variation of Ba/Ca and Sr/Ca Response in Human Hard Tissue from Archaeological Series

“…First of all, element ratios in bone, dentin and enamel may reflect the specific responses of each tissue to sampling (ablation). Second, ratios may differ due to the heterogeneity of each element within living tissue caused by an individual's development, specific way of metabolism, tissue mineral incorporation, differences in the elements' absorption or age-dependent changes (Dolphin et al 2005) and diseases (Alvira et al 2011;Gemmel et al 2002;Malara et al 2006). Third, each tissue is variably influenced by diverse post-mortem diagenetic alterations.…”

Aspects of correlation between the surface analysis and heavy metal content in temporary teeth from areas with various pollution levels of Romania

“…In the last decade, based on the heavy metal levels present in both tooth compartments, enamel and dentine, which appear as permanent and chronological indicators for the nutrition state and also for the individual exposure to the environmental factors, many studies have been devoted to correlation between oral health, composition and surface aspects of teeth from various regions of the world, with different potential risks to the impact of heavy metals [1][2][3]. A series of papers contained arguments for relation between heavy metal content and the number of carries of patients, but according to literature data [1,4,5] it is difficult to have a clear conclusion in this moment [7][8][9].…”

“…A series of papers contained arguments for relation between heavy metal content and the number of carries of patients, but according to literature data [1,4,5] it is difficult to have a clear conclusion in this moment [7][8][9]. First of all the number of carries as an expression of oral health could be the result of many other social factors, and despite the fact that the environment quality is a part of quality of life, it is very difficult to be sure that the teeth are collected from a target group with similar life conditions.…”