IADR Abstract Archives
Influencing factor of dentin hardness: an in vitro study
Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the dentin hardness of maxillary premolars and to analyze its variation according to several parameters.
Methods: Thirty four maxillary premolars were included in resin and cut in coronary, cervical and root slices using ISOMET TM,. The dentin hardness was measured
By the « D-SHORE HARDNESS DUROMETER » at the buccal, lingual, mesial and distal sides of each slice. The data were statistically analyzed by SPSS 17.0.
Results: Dentin hardness of men was statistically higher than women’s, only on cervical slices. However, the coronal and root dentin hardness increased with age, sparing the cervical region. The hardness of the coronal and root lingual surfaces was more important than that of coronal and root buccal surfaces. There was no difference in hardness between the mesial and distal surfaces. Neither the root number nor the tooth position in the arch (first or second premolar, right or left one) influenced the dentin hardness.In addition, the dentin hardness values significantly decreased from the crown to the root.
Conclusions: Dentin hardness is not a fixed value. Its variation depends on several parameters (sex, age, teeth maturation, tooth surface…). The difference in hardness appears to be influenced by constitutional, morphological, functional, structural, genetic and developmental factors. The clinical applications of this study’s data are also revealed through this work.
Methods: Thirty four maxillary premolars were included in resin and cut in coronary, cervical and root slices using ISOMET TM,. The dentin hardness was measured
By the « D-SHORE HARDNESS DUROMETER » at the buccal, lingual, mesial and distal sides of each slice. The data were statistically analyzed by SPSS 17.0.
Results: Dentin hardness of men was statistically higher than women’s, only on cervical slices. However, the coronal and root dentin hardness increased with age, sparing the cervical region. The hardness of the coronal and root lingual surfaces was more important than that of coronal and root buccal surfaces. There was no difference in hardness between the mesial and distal surfaces. Neither the root number nor the tooth position in the arch (first or second premolar, right or left one) influenced the dentin hardness.In addition, the dentin hardness values significantly decreased from the crown to the root.
Conclusions: Dentin hardness is not a fixed value. Its variation depends on several parameters (sex, age, teeth maturation, tooth surface…). The difference in hardness appears to be influenced by constitutional, morphological, functional, structural, genetic and developmental factors. The clinical applications of this study’s data are also revealed through this work.