We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry



Forgotten password?


Dear readers,

our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.

Your Quintessence Publishing House
Oral Health Prev Dent 18 (2020), Open Access     12. Feb. 2020
Oral Health Prev Dent 18 (2020), Open Access  (12.02.2020)

Open Access CARIOLOGY, Online Article, Page 601-606, doi:10.3290/j.ohpd.a43893, PubMed:32176227

Online Article: The Effects of Different Anticavity Agents and Er:YAG Laser Usage on Enamel Surface Microhardness
Polat, Yiğit Kaan / Ilday, Nurcan Ozakar
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to perform an in vitro evaluation of the protective effects of anticavity agents applied to enamel, by themselves and in combination with Er:YAG.
Materials and Methods: In this study 150 extracted third molars were used. Measurements were made using DIAGNOdent, and samples with scores of 0–13 were included in the study. These were divided into 15 groups (n = 20). Use of the agents sodium fluoride (NaF), tricalcium phosphate (Ca3PO4), titanium tetrafluoride (TiF4), Tooth Mousse (CPP-ACP), MI Paste Plus (CPP-ACP), and NovaMin (bioactive glass), individually and then in combination with Er:YAG laser, was assessed based on their effects on microhardness values. After treatment, the groups were exposed to a demineralisation solution. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 20.0 package software.
Results: The highest test result value was observed in the TFL (TiF4/Er:YAG laser) group. Statistically significant differences were determined among all the groups (p <0.05). When the groups in which the agents were applied alone were compared with those involving combined use of Er:YAG laser, combined use provided significantly higher microhardness values, with the exception of the TML group (Tooth Mousse/Er:YAG laser) (p <0.05).
Conclusion: Within the limits of this study, the combined use of remineralisation agents and Er:YAG laser elicited better results than using the agents alone. The most effective remineralisation agent was TiF4/Er:YAG laser, which may be considered an alternative method for protecting the enamel against demineralisation.

Keywords: bioactive glass, casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate, demineralisation, Er:YAG laser, remineralisation, titanium tetrafluoride