Viability of using enamel and dentin from bovine origin as a substitute for human counterparts in an intraoral erosion model

Brazilian Dental Journal

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 332-336

  Turssi, Cecilia Pedroso ^a   Messias, Danielle Furtado ^b   Corona, Silmara Milori ^a   Serra, Mônica Campos ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF RIBEIRÃO PRETO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Bovine teeth; Dental erosion; Human teeth; Intraoral; Microhardness

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649368337     PISSN: 01036440     EISSN: 18064760     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402010000400008     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Zero DT. In situ caries models. Adv Dent Res 1995;9:214-230.
2. Mellberg JR. Hard-tissue substrates for evaluation of cariogenic and anti-cariogenic activity in situ. J Dent Res 1992;71:913-919.
3. Boyde A. The structure of developing mammalian dental enamel. In: Tooth Enamel. Stack MV, Fearnhead RW (Editor). Bristol: Wright; 1965. p 163-192.
4. Davidson CL, Boom G, Arends J. Calcium distribution in human and bovine surface enamel. Caries Res 1973;7:349-359.
5. Fincham AG. Changing amino acid profiles of developing dental enamel in individual human teeth and the comparison of the protein matrix of developing human and bovine enamel. Arch Oral Biol 1980;25:669-674.
6. Boyde A. Comparative histology of mammalian teeth. In: Dental Morphology and Evolution. Dahlberg AA (Editor). Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1971. p 81-94.
7. Arends J, Jongebloed WL. Crystallites dimensions of enamel. J Biol Buccale 1978;6:161-171.
8. Edmunds DH, Whittaker DK, Green RM. Suitability of human, bovine, equine, and ovine tooth enamel for studies of artificial bacterial carious lesions. Caries Res 1988;22:327-336.
9. Meurman JH, Frank RM. Progression and surface ultrastructure of in vitro caused erosive lesions in human and bovine enamel. Caries Res 1991;25:81-87.
10. Amaechi BT, Higham SM, Edgar WM. Factors influencing the development of dental erosion in vitro: enamel type, temperature and exposure time. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:624-630.
11. Attin T, Wegehaupt F, Gries D, Wiegand A. The potential of deciduous and permanent bovine enamel as substitute for deciduous and permanent human enamel: erosion-abrasion experiments. J Dent 2007;35:773-777.
12. Rios D, Honório HM, Magalhães AC, Delbem AC, Machado MA, Silva SM, et al. Effect of salivary stimulation on erosion of human and bovine enamel subjected or not to subsequent abrasion: an in situ/ex vivo study. Caries Res 2006;40:218-223.
13. Schilke R, Lisson JA, Bauss O, Geurtsen W. Comparison of the number and diameter of dentinal tubules in human and bovine dentine by scanning electron microscopic investigation. Arch Oral Biol 2000;45:355-361.
14. Hara AT, Queiroz CS, Paes Leme AF, Serra MC, Cury JA. Caries progression and inhibition in human and bovine root dentine in situ. Caries Res 2003;37:339-344.
15. Wegehaupt F, Gries D, Wiegand A, Attin T. Is bovine dentine an appropriate substitute for human dentine in erosion/abrasion tests? J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:390-394.
16. West NX, Maxwell A, Hughes JA, Parker DM, Newcombe RG, Addy M. A method to measure clinical erosion: the effect of orange juice consumption on erosion of enamel. J Dent 1998;26:329-335.
17. Featherstone JD, ten Cate JM, Shariati M, Arends J. Comparison of artificial caries-like lesions by quantitative microradiography and microhardness profiles. Caries Res 1983;17:385-391.
18. Meredith N, Sherriff M, Setchell DJ, Swanson SA. Measurement of the microhardness and Young's modulus of human enamel and dentine using an indentation technique. Arch Oral Biol 1996;41:539-545.
19. Hara AT, Lussi A, Zero DT. Biological factors. Monogr Oral Sci 2006;20:88-99.
20. Machado C, Lacefield W, Catledge A. Human enamel nanohardness, elastic modulus and surface integrity after beverage contact. Braz Dent J 2008;19:68-72.