We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website and to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage. You will find more information in our privacy policy. OK, I have understood
Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Oral Health Prev Dent 14 (2016), No. 4     9. Aug. 2016
Oral Health Prev Dent 14 (2016), No. 4  (09.08.2016)

Page 371-380, doi:10.3290/j.ohpd.a35747, PubMed:26973990


In Vitro Inhibition of Enamel Demineralisation by Fluoride-releasing Restorative Materials and Dental Adhesives
Dionysopoulos, Dimitrios / Koliniotou-Koumpia, Eugenia / Helvatzoglou-Antoniades, Maria / Kotsanos, Nikolaos
Purpose: To determine the ability of 5 contemporary fluoride-releasing restoratives and 3 fluoride-releasing adhesives to inhibit enamel demineralisation surrounding restorations, and the associations between inhibition and the levels of fluoride released from these materials.
Materials and Methods: Five fluoride-releasing restoratives (Fuji IX GP, Ketac N100, Dyract Extra, Beautifil II and Wave) and 3 fluoride-releasing adhesives (Stae, Prime & Bond NT and Fluoro Bond II) were investigated. Eight disks of each material were prepared. Fluoride release was measured daily using a fluoride-ion-selective electrode for 15 days. Twenty-four cavities for each group were restored with a restorative and an adhesive. Specimens were subjected to thermal stress and stored for 30 days in saline solution. After a 15-day pH-cycling regimen, two 150-μm-thick sections were derived from each specimen. Enamel lesion depth was measured at 0, 100, and 200 μm from each restoration's margin via polarised light microscopy.
Results: Of the restoratives investigated, Fuji IX GP released the most fluoride. The fluoride-releasing restoratives tested exhibited shallower enamel lesions than did the control group at all distances tested (p < 0.05). Fuji IX GP yielded significantly lower enamel lesion depth than did the other experimental materials. The depths of enamel lesions did not differ significantly when comparing restoratives applied with a fluoride-releasing adhesive with those applied with a non-fluoride-releasing adhesive.
Conclusion: The fluoride-releasing materials tested reduced enamel demineralisation but to different extents, depending on their levels of fluoride release. Fluoride-releasing adhesives did not influence enamel lesion formation.

Keywords: fluoride-releasing adhesives, fluoride-releasing restoratives, inhibition of enamel demineralisation
fulltext (no access granted) order article as PDF-file (20.00 €)