Advertisement

Primary and Permanent Dentitions: Characteristics and Differences

  • Vanessa P. P. Costa
  • Ingrid Q. D. de Queiroz
  • Érica N. Lia
Chapter

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to present the anatomical characteristics and differences between the primary and permanent dentitions. The chapter also discusses the main dental anatomy implications with respect to primary teeth on restorative procedures such as difficulties of isolation with rubber dam, materials adhesion, risk of cervical wall loss during cavity preparation/cleaning, longevity of restorations, and risk of pulp exposure.

Keywords

Morphology Dentition Child Dental restoration 

References

  1. 1.
    Diáz E, et al. Frequency and variability of dental morphology in deciduous and permanent dentition of a Nasa indigenous group in the municipality of Morales, Cauca, Colombia. Colomb Med. 2014;45(1):15–24.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pretty IA, Sweet D. Forensic dentistry: a look at forensic dentistry – part 1: the role of teeth in the determination of human identity. Br Dent J. 2001;190:359–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Figún ME. Sistema dental. In: Figún ME, Garino RR, editors. Anatomia Odontológica Funcional e Aplicada. Guelph: Artmed; 2003. p. 248–319.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baume LJ. Physiological tooth migration and its significance for the development of occlusion. The biogenetic course of deciduous dentition. J Dent Res. 1950;29(2):123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsai HH. Variations among the primary maxillary dental arch forms using a polynominal equation model. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2003;27:267–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Toledo AO, Leal SC. Crescimento e desenvolvimento. In: Toledo OA, editor. Odontopediatria. Fundamentos para a prática clínica. 4th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Medbook; 2012. p. 1–21.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Inada E, et al. Comparison of normal permanent and primary dentition sagittal tooth crown inclinations of Japanese females. Cranio. 2012;30(1):41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chowdhary N, Subba Reddy VV. Dentin comparison in primary and permanent molars under transmitted and polarised light microscopy: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2010;28(3):167–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Linden LA, Bjõrkman S, Hattab F. The diffusion in vitro of fluoride and chlorhexidine in the enamel of human deciduous and permanent teeth. Arch Oral Biol. 1986;31:33–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang LJ, et al. Enamel demineralization in primary and permanent teeth. J Dent Res. 2006;85(4):359–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Soldani F, Foley J. An assessment of rubber dam usage amongst specialists in paediatric dentistry practising within the UK. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2007;17(1):50–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Varughese RE, et al. An assessment of direct restorative material use in posterior teeth by American and Canadian Pediatric Dentists: II. Rubber Dam Isolation. Pediatr Dent. 2016;38(7):497–501.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang Y, et al. Rubber dam isolation for restorative treatment in dental patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;9:CD009858.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pitchika V, et al. Comparison of different protocols for performing adhesive restorations in primary teeth – a retrospective clinical study. J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(5):447–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lenzi TL, et al. Adhesive systems for restoring primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2016;26(5):364–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Güngör HC, et al. The effects of dentin adhesives and liner materials on the microleakage of class II resin composite restorations in primary and permanent teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2014;38(3):223–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Myaki SI. Tratamento das Lesões de Cárie em Dentes Decíduos. In: Toledo OA, editor. Odontopediatria. Fundamentos para a prática clínica. 4th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Medbook; 2012. p. 177–201.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baldissera RA, Corrêa MB, Schuch HS, Collares K, Nascimento GG, Jardim PS, et al. Are there universal restorative composites for anterior and posterior teeth? J Dent. 2013;41:1027–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yengopal V, et al. Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;15(2):CD004483.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pinto G dos S, et al. Longevity of posterior restorations in primary teeth: results from a paediatric dental clinic. J Dent. 2014;42(10):1248–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater. 2012;28:87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    van de Sande FH, Opdam NJ, Rodolpho PA, Correa MB, Demarco FF, Cenci MS. Patient risk factors’ influence on survival of posterior composites. J Dent Res. 2013;92:78S–83S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Freitas M, Santos J, Fuks A, Bezerra A, Azevedo T. Minimal intervention dentistry procedures: a ten year retrospective study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2014;39(1):64–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Casagrande L, et al. Longevity and associated risk factors in adhesive restorations of young permanent teeth after complete and selective caries removal: a retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(3):847–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vanessa P. P. Costa
    • 1
  • Ingrid Q. D. de Queiroz
    • 2
  • Érica N. Lia
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Health ScienceUniversity of BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil
  2. 2.Post-Graduate Program in DentistryUniversity of BrasíliaBrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations