Mineral Density Distribution Differences in Enamel and Dentin Tissues in the Teeth Array According to the HU Scale


  • Yasemin Yavuz
  • Ebru Akleyin


Diagnostic Imaging, Tomography, Dental Enamel, Dentin


Objective: To evaluate the mineral density of enamel and dentin tissues of healthy individuals using three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography. Material and Methods: CBCT images of 15 healthy individuals, previously obtained for various reasons, were used in this study. In HU measurements, mineral density measurements were made from three different regions of enamel and three different regions of dentin, and the values obtained were compared. Enamel and dentin mineralization density measurements were measured from six regions, namely the crown cutting edge, buccal middle and cervical region for enamel, and the crown cutting edge, cervical region and root apex for dentin. In the comparisons of groups, the parametric One-Way ANOVA variance analysis method was applied. In the paired comparisons between the groups, the Tukey HSD test was applied as the multiple comparison post hoc test. A value of p<0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. Results: Mineralization density of tooth enamel and dentin tissues was quantitatively different in the maxilla and mandible in anterior and posterior teeth. Conclusion: In all the teeth, there were statistically significant decreases in the mineral density values of enamel and dentin tissue from occlusal towards the cemento-enamel junction. Statistically significant decreases were observed in the mineral density values of enamel and dentin tissue from the anterior region towards the posterior region in the teeth in both the upper and lower jaws.


İhsan Y, Hatice SK. Diş Çürüğü ve Diş Sert Dokuları. Turkiye Klinikleri J Restor Dent-Special Topics 2016;2(1):5-8. [In Turkish].

Ten Cate AR. Oral Histology: Development, Structure, and Function. 5th ed. Saint Louis: Mosby; 1994.

Eanes ED. Enamel apatite: chemistry, structure and properties. J Dent Res 1979; 58(Spec Issue B):829-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345790580023501

Weber DF. Sheath configurations in human cuspal enamel. J Morphol 1973; 141(4):479-89. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.1051410407

Boyde A, Oksche A, Vollrath L. Handbook of Microscopic Anatomy. V/6. Oksche A, Vollrath L (eds.). Springer-Verlag; 1989: 309p. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0022-7722.2003.00041.x

Sadullah K, İzzet Y, İbrahim U, Zeki A. Measuring bone density in healing periapical lesions by using cone beam computed tomography: a clinical investigation. J Endod 2012; 38(1):28-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.032

Azhari, Fahmi O, Fariska I. Normal value of cortical and mandibular trabecular bone density using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). J Int Dent Medical Res 2019; 12 (1):160-4.

Silviana FD, Azhari, Farina P, Sri T. Analysis of Beta-Crosslaps (Β-Ctx) and mandible trabecular parameters in menopausal women using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). J Int Dent Medical Res 2020; 13 (1):189-93.

Ebru A, Myroslav GK. Cone beamed computerized dental tomography in dentistry. J Int Dent Medical Res 2019; 12(4):1613-7.

Razi T, Niknami M, Ghazani FA. Relationship between hounsfield unit in CT scan and gray scale in CBCT. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2014; 8:107-10. https://doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2014.019

Mah P, Reeves TE, Mc David WD. Deriving hounsfield units using grey levels in cone beam computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2010; 39:323-35. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/19603304

Lamba R, Mc Gahan JP, Corwin MT, LiC-S, Tran T, Seibert JA, et al. CT hounsfield numbers of soft tissues on unenhanced abdominal CT scans: variability between two different manufacturers’ MDCT scanners. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203:1013-20. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.10037

Izzet Y, Rizal MF, Kiswanjaya B. The possible usability of three-dimensional cone beam computed dental tomography in dental research. J Phys: Conf Series 2017; 884 012041. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/884/1/012041

Hayashi SS, Sakamoto M, Hayashi T, Kondo T, Sugita K, Sakai J, et al. Evaluation of permanent and primary enamel and dentin mineral density using micro-computed tomography. Oral Radiol 2019; 35(1):29-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-018-0315-2

Farah RA, Swain MV, Drummond BK, Cook R, Atiehb M. Mineral density of hypomineralised enamel. J Dent 2010; 38(1);50-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.09.002

Evgeniy S, Michael S, Boris M, Igor R, Andrey N, Vladimir I, et al. Characterization of enamel and dentine about a white spot lesion: mechanical properties, mineral density, microstructure and molecular composition. Nanomater 2020; 10:1889. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10091889.

Ufuk T, Burcu K, Emin E, Haluk Ö. Unilateral kondiler hiperplazinin konik işınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi ile değerlendirilmesi: iki olgu sunumu ve literatür derlemesi. J Dent Fac Ataturk Univ 2010; 20(3):198-204. [In Turkish].

Mustafa TG, Özkan M, Muhammet EN. Evaluation of histopathological reports of neoplasms diagnosed with cone beam computed tomography. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci 2021; 27(3):372-80. https://doi.org/10.5336/dentalsci.2020-77048

Muhammad KA, Phrabhakaran N, Shani AM, Norliza BI, Iqra MK, Najihah BL. Dental age estimation in Malaysian adults based on volumetric analysis of pulp/tooth ratio using CBCT data. Leg Med 2019; 36:50-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2018.10.005

Saejin P. Duck W, Dongsheng Z, Elaine R, Dwayne A. Mechanical properties of human enamel as a function of age and location in the tooth. J Mater Sci: Mater Med 2008; 19:2317-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-007-3340-y




How to Cite

Yavuz, Y., & Akleyin, E. (2023). Mineral Density Distribution Differences in Enamel and Dentin Tissues in the Teeth Array According to the HU Scale. Pesquisa Brasileira Em Odontopediatria E Clínica Integrada, 23, e220105. Retrieved from https://revista.uepb.edu.br/PBOCI/article/view/2373



Original Articles