Öz
Background: cervical enamel projections are considered to be a possible risk factor for the progression of periodontal disease into the furcation area in multi-rooted teeth. This is more likely as enamel projections lack true attachment, which exist between the alveolar bone and cementum, facilitated by periodontal ligament.
Objectives: To determine the prevalence of cervical enamel projections (CEP) in extracted teeth and
compare this with two major indications for tooth extraction, dental caries and periodontal disease.
Methodology:Teeth extracted as a result of either periodontal disease or carious lesion at the Oyo State
Government dental center Dugbe and the University College Hospital dental centre, both in Ibadan, Oyo
State were collected and used for the study. Teeth were preserved in 10% formalin immediately after
extraction and later soaked in a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and hypochlorite for 30 minutes before
rinsing and autoclaving. Extracted teeth were then examined for the presence of CEP and the prevalence
of CEP was compared based on the indication for tooth extraction.
Results: A total of 210 teeth were assessed, majority 24.8% being the upper left second molar and most of the teeth were extracted because of caries (63.3%). Eight of the teeth were found to have CEP, giving a
prevalence rate of 3.8%. CEP was found to be present in 5 (3.8%) of the teeth extracted due to caries and
in three teeth (3.9%) extracted due to periodontal disease.
Conclusion:The decision to surgically remove CEPs should be based on a careful assessment of
individual cases as the number of teeth extracted due to carious lesion that had CEPs was the same more than that extracted as a result of periodontal disease.
Keywords:Enamel projection, periodontal disease, dental caries, extracted teeth.
Résumé
Contexte: Les projections d’émail cervical sont considérées comme un facteur de risque possible de
progression de la maladie parodontale dans la zone de furcation des dents à racines multiples. Cela est
plus probable car les projections d’émail manquent de véritable attachement, qui existe entre l’os
alvéolaire et le cément, facilité par le ligament parodontal.
Objectifs: Pour déterminer la prévalence des projections d’émail cervical (PEC) dans les dents extraites etles comparer avec deux indications principales pour l’extraction dentaire, la carie dentaire et la maladie parodontale.
Méthodologie: Des dents extraites à la suite d’une maladie parodontale ou d’une lésion carieuse au centre dentaire du gouvernement de l’État d’Oyo Dugbe et au centre dentaire du Collège Hospitalier
Universitaire, toutes deux à Ibadan, dans l’État d’Oyo, ont été collectées et utilisées pour l’étude. Les
dents ont été conservées dans du formol à 10% immédiatement après l’extraction et ensuite trempées dans un mélange de peroxyde d’hydrogène et d’hypochlorite pendant 30 minutes avant le rinçage et
l’autoclavage. Les dents extraites ont ensuite été examinées pour la présence de PEC et la prévalence de
PEC a été comparée sur la base de l’indication de l’extraction dentaire.
Résultats: Un total de 210 dents a été évalué, la majorité 24,8% étant la deuxième molaire supérieure
gauche et la plupart des dents ont été extraites en raison de caries (63,3%). Huit des dents avaient une
PEC, ce qui donne un taux de prévalence de 3,8%. La PEC s’est révélée être présente dans 5 (3,8%) des
dents extraites en raison d’une carie et dans trois dents (3,9%) extraites en raison d’une maladie
parodontale.
Conclusion: La décision de retirer chirurgicalement les PECs doit être basée sur une évaluation minutieuse des cas individuels car le nombre de dents extraites en raison d’une lésion carieuse qui avait des PECs était le même que celui extrait à la suite d’une maladie parodontale.
Mots-clés: Projection de l’émail, maladie parodontale, carie dentaire, dents extraites .
Correspondence: Dr. O.I. Opeodu, Department of Periodontology and Community Dentistry, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. Email: opeodulanre1971@gmail.com
Referanslar
Lang NP and Bartold PM. Periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(Suppl 20): S9-S16. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12936.
Papapanou PN, Sanz M, et al. Periodontitis: Consensus report of Workgroup 2 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45(Suppl 20): S162-S170. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12946.
Tatakis DN and Kumar PS. Etiology and pathogenesis of periodontal diseases. Dent Clin N Am 2005; 49: 491-516.
Academy report. The pathogenesis of periodontal diseases. J Periodontol 1999; 70: 457-470.
Deo V and Bhongade ML. Pathogenesis of periodontitis: role of cytokines in host response. Dent Today 2010; 29: 60-62.
Hasan A and Palmer RM. A clinical guide to periodontology: pathology of periodontal disease. Br Dent J 2016; 216:457-461 (DOI: 10.1038/sj/bdj.2014.299).
Kornman KS and Löe H. The role of local factors in the etiology of periodontal diseases. Periodontol 2000 1993; 2: 83-97.
Attar NB and Phadnaik MB. Bilateral cervicoenamel projection and its management: a case report with lingual involvement. J Indian Soc Periodontol 2009; 13: 168-171.
Armitage P and Berry G. Statistical methods in medical research, 3rd ed., Oxford, Blackwell Science, 1994.
Oginni FO. Tooth loss in a sub-urban Nigerian population: causes and pattern of mortality revisited. Int Dent J 2005; 55:17-23.
Saheeb BD and Sede MA. Reasons and pattern of tooth mortality in a Nigerian Urban teaching hospital. Ann Afr Med. 2013;12:110–114.
Taiwo OA, Sulaiman OA, Shoremi OO, et al. Pattern and indications for adult permanent teeth extraction in Zamfara State, Northwest Nigeria. J Stoma 2015; 68:183-90.
Gbolahan OO, Fasola AO, Ayantunde AA and Oni LO. A prospective analysis of indications, pattern of tooth extraction and predictors of multiple extractions in an urban adult population in South Western Nigeria. Afr J Med Med Sci. 2017; 46:313-319.
Petersen PE, Bourgeois D, Ogawa H, Estupinan-Day S and Ndiaye C. The global burden of oral diseases and risks to oral health. Bull World Health Organ. 2005; 83:661-669.
Aderinokun GA and Dosumu OO. Causes of tooth mortality in a Nigerian urban centre. Odonto-Stomatologie Trop.1997;79:6–8.
Zee KY and Bratthall G. Prevalence of cervical enamel projection and its correlation with furcation involvement in eskimos dry skulls. Swed Dent J. 2003; 27:43-48.
Bhusari P, Sugandhi A, Belludi SA and Khan S. Prevalence of enamel projections and its co-relation with furcation involvement in maxillary and mandibular molars: A study on dry skull. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2013; 17: 601–604. doi: 10.4103/0972-124X.119290.
Souza MRL, Marques AAF, Junior ECS, Vargas TA and Garcia LFR. Prevalence of cervical enamel projection in human molars. Dent Hypotheses 2014; 5:21-24.
Grewe JM, Meskin LH and Miller T. Cervical Enamel Projections: Prevalence, Location, and Extent; with Associated Periodontal Implications. J Periodontol 1965; 36:460-465.