Ìåäèöèíà / 8. Ìîðôîëîãèÿ

 

                                              Tiron O.I., Todorova A.V.

 

                                Odessa National Medical University, Ukraine

The types of enamel rods pathways and their contribution to the mechanical behavior of tooth enamel

Human enamel is a unique biocomposite material, whose mechanical properties enable it to protect underlying soft dentin and pulp and survive millions masticatory cycles without fracturing [1,2]. Being hard and crack resistant at the same time it caused vast interest in both morphologists and material scientists [3]. Inorganic material comprises more than 96% of the human enamel and previously this fact was believed to be the only one which is responsible for the unique mechanical properties of this material. It, undoubtedly, explained the phenomenon of the hardness of enamel. However, the question regarding its crack resistance had been remaining unclear for a long period of time. But with the development of research methods it was estimated that the complex hierarchical structure of tooth enamel plays crucial role in its so-called “mechanical behavior” [4].

Enamel is considered to have six levels of organization. The second level is a level of multiple crystals or enamel rods (prisms) and it appears to be the most important in terms of its contribution to the mechanical properties [5]. Enamel prism is a rod-like structure and it is known as the structural and functional unit of the human enamel. It has a key-hole shape, consisting of head, tail and rod sheath. The head of enamel rod is composed of ribbon-like hydroxyapatite (HAP) crystals which are arranged roughly parallel to the rod long axis.  The rod sheaths and tails are the sites of higher organic content and, therefore, in these areas the HAP crystals fan out from center towards the edges. In human, unlike other species, the enamel does not exhibit the interrod material itself, so the tails of enamel rods act as the interrod substance. The rod sheaths and the tails of enamel rods, since they contain higher concentration of the organic protein remnants, are responsible for stress absorption and its equal distribution within the enamel, thereby preventing it form fracturing [6].

Taking all the abovementioned into account, it should be acknowledged that the patterns of enamel rods arrangement within the human enamel do contribute to its mechanical properties. Although enamel rod is known to extend continuously from the dentin-enamel junction (DEJ) to the enamel surface, its length is higher than the enamel thickness due to its irregular pathway [7].

In our previous research, on the example of human permanent first molar tooth, we estimated that there are two types of the enamel rod pathways occurring in human enamel – straight-lined and arc-shaped.  Moreover, the direction of the arc peak (in case of the arc-shaped pathways) might be towards the enamel surface or, oppositely, towards the tooth root.  The combination of these three types of enamel rods pathways differs among different surface of one tooth [8].

The principal aim of the current research was to estimate whether the mechanical properties in different parts of the tooth crown differ depending on the type of the enamel rod pathway characteristic for each of them.

For this purpose the hardness of the tooth enamel was measured at three different sites of the molar crown, each exhibiting one of the three variants of enamel rods pathway (straight-lined, arc-shaped directed towards the enamel surface, and arc-shaped directed towards the tooth root).  

The obtained results show that different types of enamel rods pathways do contribute to different hardness values and this can be used for the prediction of the mechanical response of different parts of the tooth crown to applied force.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References:

1. Nanci A. Ten Cates oral histology. Development,structure and function / A. Nanci // 7th edn.  St Louis, MO: Mosby, 2007.

2. Kishen A. Experimental studies on the nature of property gradients in the human dentine. / A. Kishen, U. Ramamurty U, A. Asundi. // J Biomed Mater Res. – 2000. – ¹51. – Ñ. 650–9.

3. Mechanical behaviour of human enamel and the relationship to its structural and compositional characteristics : thesis. Ph.D. / . – Sydney, Australia, 2008. – 187.

4. Jeng Y.R. Human enamel rods presents anisotropic nanotribological properties. / Y.R. Jeng, T.T Lin, H.M. Hsu et al. // Mech. behave biomed.2011.  ¹4(4). S. 515-522.

5. Maas M.C. Built to last: the structure, function, and evolution of primate dental enamel. / M.C. Maas, E.R. // Evol. Anthropol. 1999. ¹ 8 S. 133–152.

     6. Gao H. Materials become insensitive to flaws nanoscale: lessons from nature. / H.

     GaoB. Ji , I.L. Jager , E. Arzt, P. Fratzl // Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 2003. USA 100.            S. 5597–5600.

7. Áûêîâ Â.Ë. Ãèñòîëîãèÿ è ýìáðèîëîãèÿ îðãàíîâ ïîëîñòè ðòà ÷åëîâåêà. / Â.Ë. Áûêîâ // – Ñ-Ï.: Ñïåöèàëüíàÿ ëèòåðàòóðà, 1996. C.188-198.

8.  Todorova A.V. The features of enamel rods arrangement at the different surfaces of human permanent molar teeth. / A.V. Todorova, V. E. Breus, V. O. Ulianov // ODES’KIJ MEDIČNIJ ŽURNAL. 2016.   ¹ 3(155). S. 54-58.