Cementoenamel Junction: Morphological Characterization in Nepali Population
PDF

Keywords

Cementoenamel junction
morphological types
nepali population

Abstract

Introduction: Cementoenamel junction (CEJ) represents the anatomic limit between the crown and root surface and is defined as the area of the union of the cementum and enamel at the cervical region of the tooth. However, the type of CEJ in the Nepali population is not well documented.

Objective: In the present study, the authours attempt to characterize the morphological type of CEJ in the Nepali population.

Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study using a total of 300 CEJs from the Nepali population visiting the Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences, Department of Dental Surgery, Dhulikhel Hospital (KUSMS-DH) between January 2023 to August 2023. Extracted teeth were sectioned to 250μm thickness and observed under the light microscope to determine the type of CEJ.

Results: Most of the samples presented type I CEJ. Type I, II, and III CEJ were seen in 149 (49.67%), 103 (34.33%), and 48 (16%) of the samples respectively. Additionally, 110 (73.34%) of the samples showed similar types of CEJ in both the buccal and palatal sides of the same tooth while 40 (26.66%) had different types of CEJ within the same tooth.

Conclusions: Type I CEJ is the most common in the Nepalese population. The type of CEJ shows variation within the same teeth in different areas.

PDF

References

Schroeder HE, Scherle WF. Cemento-enamel junction revisited. J Periodontal Res. 1988;23(1):53-9.
Vandana KL, Haneet RK. Cementoenamel junction: An insight. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2014;18(5):549-54.
Vandana KL, Gupta I. The location of cemento enamel junction for CAL measurement: A clinical crisis. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2009;13(1):12-5.
Sodal ATT, Hove LH, Diep MT, Skudutyte-Rysstad R, Koldsland OC. Periodontal conditions in a 65-year-old population and prevalence of periodontitis according to three different bone level thresholds. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):246.
Grossman ES, Hargreaves JA. Variable cementoenamel junction in one person. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;65(1):93-7.
Rosalia L, Venera M, Carla L, Rosario C, Candida C, Orazio V, et al. The amelocemental junction ultrastructure in primary teeth. A SEM investigation. Int J Anat Embryol. 1995;100(1):11-7.
Koju S, Maharjan N, Yadav DK, Bajracharya D, Baral R, Ojha Bidhata. Morphological analysis of cemento-enamel junction in permanent dentition based on gender and arches. J Kantipur Dent Coll. 2021;2(1):24-8.
Desar B, Sharma BP, Shakya R. To find out the causes of extraction of teeth in the patients coming to the department of oral and maxillofacial surgery at kantipur dental college teaching hospital and research center from january 2014 to december 2018. Am J Biomed Sci Res. 2019;2(2):1-5.
Astekar M, Kaur P, Dhakar N, Singh J. Comparison of hard tissue interrelationships at the cervical region of teeth based on tooth type and gender difference. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2014;6(2):86-91.
Teodorovici P, Gianina I, Simona S, Andrian S. On the ratio among tough dental tissues at cervical level on various groups of teeth. Int J Med Dent. 2010;14(3):198-202.
Francischone LA, Consolaro A. Morphology of the cementoenamel junction of primary teeth. J Dent Child Chic Ill. 2008;75(3):252-9.
Arambawatta K, Peiris R, Nanayakkara D. Morphology of the cemento-enamel junction in premolar teeth. J Oral Sci. 2009;51(4):623-7.