Determination and validation of criteria to define hypercementosis in two medieval samples from France (Sains-en-Gohelle, AD 7th-17th century; Jau-Dignac-et-Loirac, AD 7th-8th century).

Emmanuel d’Incau, Christine Couture, Natacha Crépeau, Fanny Chenal, Cédric Beauval, Vincent Vanderstraete, Bruno Maureille
Archives of Oral Biology. 2015-02-01; 60(2): 293-303
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2014.10.006

PubMed

Lire sur PubMed

d’Incau E(1), Couture C(2), Crépeau N(3), Chenal F(4), Beauval C(3), Vanderstraete V(2), Maureille B(2).

Author information:
(1)Université de Bordeaux, UFR des Sciences Odontologiques, 33082 Bordeaux
Cedex, France; Université de Bordeaux, PACEA, UMR 5199, 33405 Talence Cedex,
France. Electronic address: .
(2)Université de Bordeaux, PACEA, UMR 5199, 33405 Talence Cedex, France.
(3)SARL Archéosphère, 33300 Bordeaux, France.
(4)SARL Archéosphère, 33300 Bordeaux, France; ANTEA, 68440 Habsheim, France.

OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this article was to develop different visual criteria
allowing for an objective definition of hypercementosis (cementum hyperplasia).
This preliminary study must notably show how to better understand at a later
stage the significance of its frequency as well as its aetiologies, especially
in past populations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: we set up a study protocol (macroscopic and photographic
observations) on material consisting of 2 medieval samples from France (1)
Sains-en-Gohelle sample-SG (AD 7th-17th century; 407 individuals; 5756 teeth
observed, 319 with hypercementosis) which was used to develop the different
criteria for defining hypercementosis (2) Jau-Dignac-et-Loirac sample-JDL (AD
7th-8th century; 55 individuals; 709 teeth observed, 24 with hypercementosis)
which was used to test the reproducibility of the criteria.
RESULTS: From our observations we formulated different inclusion criteria with
which to define hypercementosis objectively (k intraobserver≥0.96; k
interobserver≥0.63). We were able to distinguish moderate (1m) and marked (1M)
forms of diffuse hypercementosis, focal hypercementosis in the form of small
knots (2m) or large nodules (2M), or excrescences in the form of ridges (3m) or
spurs (3M). Different exclusion criteria were also determined.
CONCLUSION: The definition that we propose in this study are based on various
statistically validated inclusion and exclusion criteria. It is hoped that this
will improve the significance of hypercementosis. More generally, this would
also give a better understanding of the dynamics of cementum apposition.