A comparative study on the effects of three types of toothbrushes on the formation of abfraction lesions in teeth

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2025.04.014

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the differences in formation of abfraction lesions using three different types of toothbrushes, i.e. mechanical electric toothbrush, sonic electric toothbrush, and ordinary manual toothbrush. METHODS: Seventy-one subjects were recruited publicly and randomly divided into three groups with 24 subjects in the mechanical electric toothbrush group (experimental group 1), another 24 subjects in the sonic electric toothbrush group (experimental group 2), and 23 subjects in the ordinary manual toothbrush group (control group). The observation period was 12-15 months. During the beginning and the end of the experiment, oral digital impressions were obtained by using 3Shape TRIOS 3 intraoral scanning device (Denmark). The two 3D Object (.stl) files obtained were compared and overlapped by using EXO CAD software,and the numerical values of the cervical changes of all canines, first premolars, and second premolars on the labial and buccal sides of the gingival margin after comparison and overlap were measured using 3Shape 3D Viewer^TM software. RESULTS: The cervical defect values of the mechanical electric toothbrush group were significantly higher than those of the sonic electric toothbrush group and the ordinary manual toothbrush group (P<0.001), and the cervical defect values of the sonic electric toothbrush group were significantly higher than those of the ordinary manual toothbrush group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in gender within each group between the mechanical electric toothbrush group and the sonic electric toothbrush group (P>0.05), while the cervical defect values of the male subjects in the ordinary manual toothbrush group were significantly higher than those of the female subjects (P<0.001). The cervical defect value of the mechanical electric toothbrush group was significantly higher than that of the conventional manual toothbrush group at 14, 25, 35, 43, 44 and 45 tooth positions among the three groups (P<0.05). Meanwhile, the cervical defect value of the mechanical electric toothbrush group was significantly higher than that of the sonic electric toothbrush group at 44 tooth position (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the defect value among all groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ordinary manual toothbrushes, mechanical electric toothbrushes and sonic electric toothbrushes are more effective in promoting the formation of abfraction lesions. The teeth in the lower right mandible are more susceptible to abfraction lesions caused by mechanical electric toothbrushes.

Key words: Electric toothbrush, Manual toothbrush, Abfraction, Noncarious cervical lesions, Oral scanning

CLC Number:

R781.2

Xu Xiaoming, Tian Yingju, Gao Lin, Wang Junyan, Xie Xinyi. A comparative study on the effects of three types of toothbrushes on the formation of abfraction lesions in teeth[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2025, 34(4): 422-426.

References

[1] Grippo JO.Noncarious cervical lesion: the decision to ignore or restore[J]. J Esthet Dent, 1992, 4(Suppl): 55-64.
[2] Teixeira DNR, Thomas RZ, Soares PV, et al.Prevalence of noncarious cervical lesions among adults: a systematic review[J]. J Dent, 2020, 95: 103285.
[3] Soares PV, Souza LV, Veríssimo C, et al.Effect of root morphology on biomechanical behaviour of premolars associated with abfraction lesions and different loading types[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2014, 41(2): 108-114.
[4] Smith BG, Knight JK.An index for measuring the wear of teeth[J]. Br Dent J, 1984, 156(12): 435-438.
[5] 冯希平. 口腔预防医学[M]. 7版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2020: 92.
[6] Barttlet DW, Shah P.A critical review of non-carious cervical (wear) lesions and the role of abfraction, erosion, and abrasion[J]. J Dent Res, 2006, 85(4): 306-312.
[7] Hur B, Kim HC, Park JK, et al.Characteristics of non-carious cervical lesions-an ex vivo study using micro computed tomography[J]. J Oral Rehabil, 2011, 38(6): 469-474.
[8] Sakhabutdinova L, Kamenskikh AA, Kuchumov AG, et al.Numerical study of the mechanical behaviour of wedge-shaped defect filling materials[J]. Materials (Basel), 2022, 15(20): 7387.
[9] 梁景平. 非龋性颈部缺损的研究进展[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2020, 55(5): 323-328.
[10] Teixeira DNR, Zeola LF, Machado AC, et al.Relationship between noncarious cervical lesions, cervical dentin hypersensitivity, gingival recession, and associated risk factors: a cross-sectional study[J]. J Dent, 2018, 76: 93-97.
[11] Goodacre CJ, Eugene Roberts W, Munoz CA.Noncarious cervical lesions: morphology and progression, prevalence, etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical guidelines for restoration[J]. J Prosthodont, 2023, 32(2): e1-e18.
[12] 刘青, 石昕, 侯铁舟. Teetester 对于楔状缺损危险因素的初步探讨[J]. 口腔医学, 2021, 41(8): 728-731.
[13] 高岩. 口腔组织病理学[M]. 8版. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2020: 47.
[14] Grippo JO, Simring M, Coleman TA.Abfraction, abrasion, biocorrosion, and the enigma of noncarious cervical lesions: a 20-year perspective[J]. J Esthet Restor Dent,?2012, 24(1): 10-23.
[15] Walter C, Kress E, G?tz H, et al. The anatomy of non-carious cervical lesions[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2014, 18(1): 139-146.
[16] Abrahamsen TC.The worn dentition--pathognomonic patterns of abrasion and erosion[J]. Int Dent J, 2005, 55(4Suppl 1): 268-276.
[17] 刘光寿. 楔状缺损的成因分析[J]. 中国当代医药, 2009, 16(25): 25, 27.
[18] 任煜光, 韩捷. 楔状缺损的病因探讨[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 1995, 11(3): 135-137.
[19] 于华. 牙齿楔状缺损的病因学研究: 辽宁省口腔医学会第二十六次学术会议论文集[C]. 沈阳: 辽宁省口腔医学会, 2017.
[20] Ccahuana-Vasquez RA, Adam R, Conde E, et al.A 5-week randomized clinical evaluation of a novel electric toothbrush head with regular and tapered bristles versus a manual toothbrush for reduction of gingivitis and plaque[J]. Int J Dent Hyg, 2019, 17(2): 153-160.
[21] Wood I, Jawad Z, Paisley C, et al.Non-carious cervical tooth surface loss: a literature review[J]. J Dent, 2008, 36(10): 759-766.
[22] Nascimento MM, Dilbone DA, Pereira PN, et al.Abfraction lesions: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment options[J]. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent, 2016, 8: 79-87.