Conventional cultural methods were used to compare the plaque flora and the level of infection of the dentine underlying 51 occlusal brown-spot lesions and 21 sound occlusal sites on the primary dentition. Freshly extracted primary molar teeth were used, and occlusal brown-spot lesions and sound occlusal sites were identified using laser fluorescence (LF) and clinical visual methods. A standardized plaque sample was taken from each site, and an LF score was recorded for one discrete site per tooth. The teeth were carefully opened at each predetermined site to determine the clinical status of the underlying dentine, and samples were collected using a sterile bur. The microbiota of the plaque and dentine samples were enumerated and identified. The mean LF scores for the sound sites and brown-spot lesions were 1.2 and 30.5 (p < 0.001), and all the sound sites exhibited hard sound dentine, but 6 out of 51 brown spots exhibited softened dentine. Overall there was no significant (p > 0.1) difference between the level of infection of the dentine of the sound and brown-spot sites, although some sites in the brown-spot lesions yielded high numbers of bacteria. However, the numbers of bacteria as log10(CFU per sample + 1) ± SE recovered from the plaque above the brown-spot lesions were significantly greater than above the sound sites, i.e. 2.89 ± 0.24 and 0.89 ± 0.33, respectively. These data indicate that brown-spot lesions may be more plaque retentive than sound sites and that they are either arrested or arresting lesions, which may require preventive intervention.

Keywords:
Brown-spot lesions, Occlusal caries, Primary molars
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel
2006
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.