Yoder K M, Mabelya L, Robison V A, Dunipace A J, Brizendine E J, Stookey G K
Department of Oral Biology, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, USA.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998 Dec;26(6):382-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1998.tb01976.x.
To identify risk factors for dental fluorosis that cannot be explained by drinking water fluoride concentration alone.
Two hundred eighty-four Tanzanian children ages 9 to 19 (mean 14.0+/-SD 1.69), who were lifetime residents at differing altitudes (Chanika, 100 m; Rundugai, 840 m; and Kibosho, 1,463 m; Sites 1, 2, and 3 respectively) were examined for dental fluorosis and caries. They were interviewed about their food habits, environmental characteristics and use of a fluoride-containing food tenderizer known locally as magadi. Meal, urine, water and magadi samples supplied by the participants were analyzed for fluoride content. Urine samples were also analyzed for creatinine concentration. Four magadi samples from Sites 1 and 3 were analyzed for complete element composition.
Of the 13 water samples from Site 2, 10 contained > or =4 mg/L F, ranging from 1.26 to 12.36 mg/L with a mean+/-SD of 5.72+/-4.71 mg/L. Sites 1 and 3 had negligible water fluoride of 0.05+/-0.05 and 0.18+/-0.32 mg/L respectively. Mean TFI fluorosis scores (range 0-9) for Site 2 were high: 4.44+/-1.68. In Sites 1 and 3, which both had negligible water fluoride, fluorosis scores varied dramatically: Site 1 mean maximum TFI was 0.01+/-0.07 and Site 3 TFI was 4.39+/-1.52. Mean DMFS was 1.39+/-2.45, 0.15+/-0.73 and 0.19+/-0.61 at Sites 1, 2, and 3, respectively. There were no restorations present. Urinary fluoride values were 0.52+/-0.70, 4.34+/-7.62, and 1.43+/-1.80 mg/L F at Sites 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mean urinary fluoride values at Site 3 were within the normal urinary fluoride reference value range in spite of pervasive severe pitting fluorosis. Meal and magadi analyses revealed widely varied fluoride concentrations. Concentrations ranged from 0.01 to 22.04 mg/L F for meals and from 189 to 83211 mg/L F for magadi. Complete element analysis revealed the presence of aluminum, iron, magnesium, manganese, strontium and titanium in four magadi samples. There were much higher concentrations of these elements in samples from Site 3, which was at the highest altitude and had severe enamel disturbances in spite of negligible water fluoride concentration. An analysis of covariance model supported the research hypothesis that the three communities differed significantly in mean fluorosis scores (P<0.0001). Controlling for urinary fluoride concentration and urinary fluoride:urinary creatinine ratio, location appeared to significantly affect fluorosis severity. Urinary fluoride:urinary creatinine ratio had a stronger correlation than urinary fluoride concentration with mean TFI fluorosis scores (r=0.43 vs r= 0.25).
The severity of enamel disturbances at Site 3 (1463 m) was not consistent with the low fluoride concentration in drinking water, and was more severe than would be expected from the subjects' normal urinary fluoride values. Location, fluoride in magadi, other elements found in magadi, and malnutrition are variables which may be contributing to the severity of dental enamel disturbances occurring in Site 3. Altitude was a variable which differentiated the locations.
确定仅通过饮用水氟浓度无法解释的氟斑牙风险因素。
对284名年龄在9至19岁(平均14.0±标准差1.69)的坦桑尼亚儿童进行了检查,这些儿童是不同海拔地区(分别为海拔100米的查尼卡、海拔840米的伦杜盖和海拔1463米的基博肖,即第1、2、3地点)的终生居民,检查项目包括氟斑牙和龋齿情况。就他们的饮食习惯、环境特征以及使用当地称为“马加迪”的含氟食品嫩化剂的情况进行了访谈。对参与者提供的膳食、尿液、水和马加迪样本进行了氟含量分析。还对尿液样本进行了肌酐浓度分析。对来自第1和第3地点的4个马加迪样本进行了完整元素组成分析。
在第2地点的13份水样中,有10份的氟含量≥4毫克/升,范围为1.26至12.36毫克/升,平均±标准差为5.72±4.71毫克/升。第1和第3地点的水氟含量可忽略不计,分别为0.05±0.05毫克/升和0.18±0.32毫克/升。第2地点的平均TFI氟斑牙评分(范围0 - 9)较高:4.44±1.68。在水氟含量可忽略不计的第1和第3地点,氟斑牙评分差异很大:第1地点的平均最大TFI为0.01±0.07,第3地点的TFI为4.39±1.52。第1、2、3地点的平均DMFS分别为1.39±2.45、0.15±0.73和0.19±0.61。均无修复体。第1、2、3地点的尿氟值分别为0.52±0.70、4.34±7.62和1.43±1.80毫克/升氟。尽管第3地点普遍存在严重的点状氟斑牙,但该地点的平均尿氟值仍在正常尿氟参考值范围内。膳食和马加迪分析显示氟浓度差异很大。膳食中的氟浓度范围为0.01至22.04毫克/升氟,马加迪中的氟浓度范围为189至83211毫克/升氟。完整元素分析显示在4个马加迪样本中存在铝、铁、镁、锰、锶和钛。来自第3地点(海拔最高且尽管水氟浓度可忽略不计但存在严重牙釉质病变)的样本中这些元素的浓度要高得多。协方差分析模型支持了研究假设,即这三个社区的平均氟斑牙评分存在显著差异(P<0.0001)。在控制尿氟浓度和尿氟:尿肌酐比值后,地点似乎对氟斑牙严重程度有显著影响。尿氟:尿肌酐比值与平均TFI氟斑牙评分的相关性比尿氟浓度更强(r = 0.43对r = 0.25)。
第3地点(海拔1463米)牙釉质病变的严重程度与饮用水中低氟浓度不一致,且比根据受试者正常尿氟值预期的更为严重。地点、马加迪中的氟、马加迪中发现的其他元素以及营养不良是可能导致第3地点发生牙釉质病变严重程度的变量。海拔是区分这些地点的一个变量。