CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Morphol Sci 2019; 36(04): 303-308
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1695756
Review Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Morphological Differences between the First and Second Permanent Upper Molars

Luis Eduardo Genaro
1  Department of Morphology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Gabriely Ferreira
1  Department of Morphology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Marcelo Brito Conte
1  Department of Morphology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Marcela de Almeida Gonçalves
1  Department of Morphology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Ticiana Sidorenko Oliveira Capote
1  Department of Morphology, School of Dentistry, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Araraquara, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

24 April 2019

17 June 2019

Publication Date:
19 September 2019 (online)

  

Abstract

The dental elements present similar and specific anatomical features, depending on the functions they have in the oral cavity. The permanent molars are the most complex structures, mainly the occlusal face, due to their function of food grinding. The aim of the present article is to present the upper first and second molars morphology, emphasizing the similarities and differences between them. Besides, the upper first and second molars of the collection of the Department of Morphology of Universidade Estadual de Paulista (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Araraquara, were evaluated regarding the presence of the oblique ridge, frequency and classification of the molar tubercle, and the crown morphology (upper second molars). In the 372 evaluated upper first molars, the molar tubercle was absent in most of the teeth. When present, the molar tubercle belonged to the mesiolingual cusp; 8.9% were classified as type I; 9.1% as type II; and 9.4% as type III. The oblique ridge was present in all upper first molars. The morphology of 401 upper second molars was also evaluated; 64.83% were tetracuspid; 35.16% tricuspid; and 17.02% presented compression morphology. In 100 tricuspid teeth, 50% presented oblique ridge, with it being prominent in 30%. No upper second molars presented molar tubercle. Although there are similarities between the upper first and second molars, we must always be aware of the features that differ between them, so their functionality can be restored.