Annals of the University of Oradea, Fascicle: Ecotoxi cology, Animal Husbandry and Food Science and [626027]

155
Annals of the University of Oradea, Fascicle: Ecotoxi cology, Animal Husbandry and Food Science and
Technology, Vol. XVII/A2018

Analele Universitatii din Oradea, Fascicula: Ecotoxi cologie, Zootehnie si Tehnologii de Industrie
Alimentara, Vol.XVII/A 2018

INCIDENCE OF NATIVE TEETH IN BIHOR COUNTY –
STATISTICAL STUDY

Pogan Mihaela Dana, Spinean Radu, Tent Adriana, Ciavoi Gabriela , Domocoș Daniela

1University of Oradea, Faculty of Dental Medicine , P-ta 1 Decembrie 5, Oradea, Romania,
e-mail: [anonimizat]

Abstract
The presence of teeth at birth or before their normal eruption time is a rare occurrence.
Native teeth are observed in infants at birth. The etiology of native teeth is not yet fully known. Our
study covers a period of 7 years (2011-2018), during which the nu mber of births, maternal
backgrounds, newborns with native teeth, their sex and the type of birth were followed. Our study
confirmed other studies in specialty literature. A thorough clinical knowled ge and appropriate
treatment plan is essential to manage such rare conditions, which are often viewed through
superstitions by unrelated parents.

Key words: native teeth, incidence of neonatal teeth

INTRODUCTION

Native teeth are present in the oral cavity at birth and neonatal teeth
are those that erupt during the first 30 days of life. These teeth do not have
anatomical, morphological and structural features. (1a) [1].
The terminologies used to describe these teeth are: dentitia praecox,
dense connatalis, congenital teeth, fetal teeth, infantile teeth, pre-teeth, and
early teeth [3]. These dental eruption abnormalities are associated with
several superstitions. In 23 BC, Gaius Plinius Secundus believed that a
splendid future is expected for male infants with native teeth. In different
countries, such as India, Poland and Africa, there were superstitions in
general regarding their native teeth, and in African children, newborn babies
were killed shortly after birth because they were believed to bring evil. In
China, children with native teeth were felt to be harmful [2].
The incidence of native teeth is 1: 3000 live births. The most
common location of native teeth is the lower central incisors in the mandible
region [6]. The incidence of native and neonatal teeth is 85% for
imandibular incisors, followed by 11% maxillary incisors, 3% mandibular
and 3% molars, and only 1% for maxillary or molar cusps [7,8]. Of these
90% teeth are primary and only 10% are supernumerary [9]. Frequency in
women by some authors (Kates & amp; numb.), 66% for women, compared
to 31% for males [10,11,12].

The etiology of native and neonatal teeth is considered in the
multifactorial literature, and we will recall [13,14,15]. :
1.Infections with congenital syphilis; where the eruption occurs sooner or
later-
2. Malnutrition – Hypovicamines
3. Fever – Increased fever with rash during pregnancy
4. Endocrine disorders and hormonal stimulation
5. Hal said that the appearance of native and neonatal teeth is due to an
abnormal position of dental buds and is considered a hereditary factor
6. Jasmin and Clergeau-Guerithault said that osteoblastic activity in dental
buds is responsible for the eruption of native and neonatal teeth
7. Pregnant mothers accidentally exposed to toxic environment
8. Native teeth associated with various syndromes
The presence of native teeth can be associated with some syndromes such as
Hallermann-Steriff syndrome, Ellis-van creveld syndrome, steatochistoma,
multiplex, Pancyhonchia congenital, Wiedemann-Rautenchuchete, cleft lip
and palates [16,17,18,19].

The purpose of the study
The aim of our study is to determine the incidence of neonatal teeth
in Bihor county and to highlight possible factors and / or determinants in
their etiology.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

This study was conducted at the Oradea County Emergency Clinical
Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology in September 2011-August 2018.
30513 newborns were included in the study, of which 14 presented neonatal
teeth. Data on mothers were collected including information on mother's
age, number of previous pregnancies, fetal age at birth, physical condition
of mother before birth, type of birth and socio-economic environment.
After the initial consultation, the anamnesis was brought to the
knowledge of the study program and signed the consent form. We specify
that all confidentiality conditions have been met.
All newborn babies born from September 2011 to August 2018 were
subjected to a dental examination to find the position, number and clinical
appearance of their native teeth. At that time, the children did not receive
any treatment. The age of mothers was between 15-39 years.
The data were centralized in the tables and statistically processed.
Based on results and examinations, conclusions were drawn. No x-rays were
performed because of the risk of young age exposure.

157
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Between 2011-201, 30413 children were born at Clinc County Hospital of
Oradea, Obstetrics-Gynecology, of which only fourteen children were born
with native teeth, 9 girls and 5 boys.
Table 1
Distribution of native teeth in time, location, gender distribution

Year Sex Births
(Numeric)
Girls Boys
Teeth present
at birth
(numeric) Teeth present
at birth
(nominal Teeth present
at birth
(numeric) Teeth present
at birth
(nominal)
2011 1 81,71
4269
2012 2 81,71
4398
2013 1 71 1 71 4089
2014
1 81,71 3963
2015 1 71 1 81,71 3666
2016 2 81,71 1 81,71 3672
2017 1 71
3084
2018 1 81,71 1 81,71 3372
TOTAL 9
5
30513

Table 2
Distribution of mothers according to the type of birth and the place
of origin
Mother
s age Teeth present at birth
(numeric) Birth Week Socio-economic
environment
39 II GIIP C – section 39 Urban
23 II GIIP C – section 39 Rural
32 II GIIP normal birth 33/34 Rural
31 III G I normal birth 37 Rural
34 IX G VIIIP normal birth 37 Rural
15 I G I P C – section 37 Rural
28 IV G IIP C – section 39 Rural
21 IIG IIP C – section 42 Urban
23 IIG IIP normal birth 38 Rural
18 II GIIP C – section 38 Urban
37 I G I P normal birth 39 Rural
18 I G I P normal birth 36/37 Urban
25 II GIIP C – section 38 Rural
26 IIIG IIP C – section 35/36 Rural
The location of the teeth was at the lower center of the incisors. The
origin of mothers in rural areas is higher than in the urban environment. The
birth type had no significant relevance to the presence of native teeth on the
dental arch because eight children were born by caesarean and six by

spontaneous birth. Five newborns had only a central lower incisor present,
and the newborns had both central mandibular incisors. Most children born
with native teeth were the secondborn child. All the born children were
from Bihor Count y.

DISCUSSION
In specialized literature cases of children born with native and
neonatal teeth have been reported. The presence of native teeth is a rare
anomaly. The etiology of native teeth is unknown but can be linked to
several factors such as germ superposition [20, 21], infection or malnutrition
[22], febrile incidents or hormonal stimulation [23], hereditary transmission
of a dominant autosomal gene [24 ], osteoblastic activity within the germ
area related to the remodeling phenomenon [25] and hippovitaminosis [26].
Native teeth are present at birth, and neonatal teeth erupted 30 days
after birth [271]. The natal and neonatal incidence is 1: 2000 to 1: 3500 and
the prevalence is 1: 700 to 1: 30,000 depending on the type of study
[28,29,30]. The results of the current study are similar to other studies
reported. The incidence of native teeth in our study was 1: 1085.2, which is
almost similar to the above mentioned studies.
In our study we found a feminine preponderance. The most
common dentition was in the mandibular central incisors, which are also
reported in other studies [31]. As mentioned above, the type of birth has no
relevance to the presence or absence of native teeth. From a clinical point of
view, native teeth are poorly developed and have small conical shape [32].
conclusions
From the present study, there is no association between the mother's
birth type and the mother's background.
Of the total of 14 children, 9 were girls and 5 were boys. Although I
could not make a statistical study in this regard, the small number of
subjects being too small to have statistically significant value, it seems that
girls are more prone to appear of your native teeth than boys. 100% of the
native teeth were mandibular central incisors.
Children with native teeth should be thoroughly examined and
adequately treated. Parents should be properly informed in these cases
because arcade position can lead to complications (injuries to the cheeks,
tongue, lips or mother during sucking.) It is also important to explain the
conditions for the appearance of these teeth and to advise the parents who
many times they are subjected to popular superstitions with negative effects
on the acceptance of the newborn child.
It is important to supervise child growth and development in the
future, as well as to extend the studies related to the native teeth to
understand as much as possible this anomaly

159

REFERENCES

1. Massler M, Savara BS. Natal and neonatal teeth: A review of 24 cases reported in
the literature. J Pediatr. 1950;36:349 –59. [PubMed ]
2. Ardeshana A, Bargale S, Karri A, Dave B. Dentitia praecox – natal teeth: a case
report and review. Journal of Applied Dental and Medical Sciences. 2016;2(1)
3. Mhaske S, Yuwanati MB, Mhaske A, Raghavendra R, Kamath K, Saawarn
S. Natal and neonatal teeth-an overview of the literature, hindawani publishin g
corporation ISRN Paediatrics. 2013;2013:956269.[ PMC free article ] [PubMed ]
4. Leung AKC, Robson WLM. Natal teeth: a review. Journal of the National Med ical
Association. 2006;98(2):226 –28. [PMC free article ] [PubMed ]
5. Rao RS, Mathad SV. Natal teeth: Case report and review of literature. J Oral
MaxillofacPathol. 2009;13(1):41 –46. [PMC free article ] [PubMed ]
6. Venkatesh C, Adhisivam B. Natal teeth in an infant with congenital
hypothyroidism. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2011;22(3):498. [ PubMed ]
7. Chowdhary S, Tandon S. Congenital teeth: superstition and reality – a case report
and review of literature. International Journal of Scientific Study. 2014;1( 5):53 –
56.
8. Kates GA, Needleman HL, Holmes LB. Natal and neonatal teeth: a clinical
study. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984;109:441 –43. [PubMed ]
9. Baskar S, Deepa G. Incidence of natal and neonatal teeth in infants born from
assisted reproductive technology treatments and normal reproductive patterns at
tertiary care centre, Chennai. A pilot study. International Journal of Pharm acy
Practice and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2015;2(11):01 –03.
10. Cunha RF, Boer FAC, Torriani DD, Frossard WTG. Natal and neonatal teeth:
review of the literature. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. 2001;23:2.
11. Boyd JD, Miles AE. Erupted teeth in ciclopsfaetus. Br Dent
J. 1951;91:173. [ PubMed ]
12. Shafer WG, Hine MK, Levy BM. In: Tratado de PatologiaBucal. 4a Ed. Rio de
Janeiro: Guanabara; 1985. Distúrbios do desenvolvimento das estruturasbucais e
parabucais; pp. 2 –79.
13. Leung AKC. Natal teeth. Am J Dis Child. 1986 ;140:249 –51. [PubMed ]
14. Bigeard L, Hemmerle J, Sommermater JI. Clinical and ultrastructural study of the
natal tooth: enamel and dentin assessments. J Dent Child. 1996;63:23 –
31. [PubMed ]
15. Shafer WG, Hine MK, Levy BM. In: Tratado de PatologiaBucal. 4a ed. Rio d e
Janeiro: Guanabara; 1985. Distúrbios do desenvolvimento das estruturasbucais e
parabucais; pp. 02 –79.
16. Jasmin JR, Clergeau-Guerithalt A scanning electron microscopic study of the
enamel of neonatal teeth. J Biol Buccale. 1991;19:309 –14. [PubMed ]
17. Anderson RA. Natal and neonatal teeth: histologic investigation of two black
females. J Dent Child. 1982;49:300 –03. [PubMed ]
18. Gorlin RJ, Goldman HM, Thoma K. In: Patologia Oral. 4th ed. Barcelona:
Salvatore; 1973. pp. 163 –166.
19. Wang CH, Lin YT, Lin YJ. A survey of natal and neonatal teeth in new born
infants. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association. 2016:pii, S0929 –
6646(16)30038- 39.

20. Basavanthappa NN, Kagathur U, Basavanthappa RN, Suryaprakash ST. Natal and
neonatal teeth: A retrospective study of 15 cases. Eur J Dent. 2011;5(2) :168 –
72. [PMC free article ] [PubMed ]
21. Buchanan S, Jenkins CR. Riga-Fedes syndrome: natal or neonatal teeth associated
with tongue ulceration: Case report. Aust Dent J. 1997;42:225 –27. [PubMed ]
22. Tomizawa M, Yamada Y, Tonouchi K, Watanabe H, Noda T. Treatment of Riga-
Fede ’s disease by resin-coverage of the incisal edges and seven cases of natal and
neonatal teeth. ShoniShikagakuZasshi. 1989;27:182 –90. [PubMed ]
23. Hedge RJ. Sublingual traumatic ulceration due to neonatal teeth (Riga-Fede
disease) J Indian Soc PedodPrev Dent. 2005;3:51 –52. [PubMed]
24. Smith DD. Natal and neonatal teeth. Available
at: http://www.dermnetnz.org/topics/natal-and-neonatal-teeth.
25. MOURA LF,MOURA MS,LIMA MD,LIMA CC,Natal and neonatal teeth:a
review of23 cases. J Dent Child,2014;81(2):107- 11
26. Anegundi RT, Sudha P, Kaveri H, Sadanand K. Natal and neonatal teeth: a report
of 4 cases. J Indian Soc PedoPrev Dent. 2002; 20:86- 92.
27. Markou I, Kana A, Arhakis A. Natal and Neonatal Teeth: A Review of
theLiterature. Balk J Stom, 2012; 16:132-140.
28. Rao RS, Mathad SV. Natal teeth: Case report andreview of literature. J Oral
MaxillofacPathol.
29. 2009; 13: 41 –6.
30. Leung AK, Robson WL. Natal teeth: a review. J Natl Med Assoc. 2006;98:226 -8.
31. Khalifa AM, El Gendy RA, Abd El-Mohsen MM, Hammour AA, El Lateef Al y
RSA. Relationshipbetweengestationalage, birthweightanddeciduoustootheruptio n.
Gaz EgyptPaediatr Assoc.2014; 62:41 –45
32. Kates GA, Needleman HL, Holmes LB. Natal and neonatal teeth: a clinicalstudy. J
Am Dent Assoc.1984;109:441-3
33. Alaluusua S, Kiviranta H, Leppaniemi A, Holtta P, Lukinmaa PL, Lope L,
Jarvenpaa AL, Renlund M, Toppari J, Virtanen H, Kaleva M, Vartiainen T. Natal
and Neonatal Teeth in RelationtoEnvironmentalToxicants. PediatrRes.
2002;52:652- 5.