Mesiodistal and buccolingual crown size and height  of deciduous teeth from a tooth bank in Brazil

Anfe, Taciana Emília de Almeida; Arakaki, Yuri; Nakamura, Denise Moral; Vieira, Glauco Fioranelli

doi:10.14295/bds.2012.v15i1.761

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sectional matrix bands of pediatric patients were 5.5 mm in height with a thickness of 0.0015 inches. According to Anfe TEA et al, 12 the height of the second deciduous molar is 5.501 mm, whereas the height of the sectional matrix bands for adults are 6.4 mm. This means that the pedodontic sectional matrix system height was formulated according to the height of the primary teeth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Bhatia¹,

Sood²,

Sharma³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A bstract Aim To compare two matrix systems (circumferential and sectional) based on clinical efficiency and patient acceptability for placement of visible light cure composite resin restorative material in a Class II cavity in primary molars. Materials and methods Thirty children with bilateral Class II cavities of age-group 5–9 years were selected. A split-mouth comparative experimental study was conducted at Manav Rachna Dental College, India. Cavities were restored using either circumferential or sectional matrix band system. The child upon completion of the treatment filled the subject preference questionnaire. Time assessment was done for matrix system placement. Contact points were evaluated using dental floss as open or closed. Results Time required to place sectional matrices was more (125.30 ± 29.40) than required for circumferential matrices (117.20 ± 38.94). The sectional matrices group has more ideal contacts (23) (76.7%) than the circumferential matrices group (16) (53.3%). About 70% of the children pointed discomfort toward the sectional matrices. Children in this study accepted circumferential matrices to be more comfortable than the sectional matrices group. Conclusion The circumferential matrices group was more time efficient compared to the sectional matrices group. However, sectional matrices resulted in a greater number of restorations with ideal contacts. Based on the preference circumferential matrix band system has been found superior to sectional matrix band system. Clinical significance This study was conducted to find a better matrix system in case of pediatric patients. Circumferential matrices were found to be more superior with respect to preference and time efficiency and sectional matrices were preferred for ideal contacts. How to cite this article Bhatia HP, Sood S, Sharma N, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(6):748–751.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Bhatia¹,

Sood²,

Sharma³

et al. 2021

International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As the Carthage crowns were 0.6mm shorter, they increased their age estimates by around four weeks. Human populations differ markedly in their tooth dimensions (Coughlin 1967;Yuen et al 1997;Hanihara & Ishida 2005;Anfe et al 2012), however, so any effect that heat might have on tooth size can be determined only by measuring the same teeth, pre-and post-cremation, as Deutsch and colleagues (Deutsch & Shapira 1987;Mayer et al 1990;Sydney-Zax et al 1991) and Soliel et al (1958) did. These studies revealed that shrinkage is at best negligible-a fact that Soliel et al used to identify pre-and perinates in their Carthage Tophet sample.…”

Section: Tooth-crown Shrinkagementioning

confidence: 99%

Two tales of one city: data, inference and Carthaginian infant sacrifice

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Crown dimensions of primary teeth—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Bhavyaa

Muthu

et al. 2022

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Odontometrics, also known as metric traits, includes mesiodistal, buccolingual dimensions, and crown height. The purpose of this study was to assess pancontinental odontometric variations in the crown dimensions of primary teeth. Ten electronic databases were searched to identify studies that measured crown dimensions of primary teeth, published in English language, without year restriction up to July 2020.Studies included cross-sectional research measuring on casts, subjects, and on radiographs of healthy children. Meta-analysis was performed, and risk of bias was assessed using modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Eighty-seven observational studies were included, with 24,634 participants (9487 males, 11,083 females; 19 studies lacked gender information). Only one study showed a low bias risk, whereas 81 and 5 studies had moderate and high risk, respectively. Sixty-five studies included for metaanalysis revealed heterogeneity in mean mesiodistal dimensions of maxillary first molars from Asia (I 2 -99.7%), buccolingual measurements of mandibular first molars from Europe (I 2 -99.9%), crown height of mandibular second molars from Africa and Europe (I 2 -79.8%). Among mesiodistal and buccolingual dimensions, Australians have larger while Asians have smaller teeth. Pertaining to crown height, very few studies could be found in the literature. This review highlights the variations in crown dimensions of primary teeth among populations.

show abstract

Mesiodistal and buccolingual crown size and height of deciduous teeth from a tooth bank in Brazil

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Two tales of one city: data, inference and Carthaginian infant sacrifice

Crown dimensions of primary teeth—A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About