Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry
OHPD Home Page
OHPD Pre-Print
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
Official Website
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: OHPD

 

Oral Health & Preventive Dentistry

Edited by Anton Sculean, Poul Erik Petersen, Avijit Banerjee

ISSN (print) 1602-1622 • ISSN (online) 1757-9996

Publication:

September/October 2018
Volume 16 , Issue 5



Pages: 417–424
DOI: 10.3290/j.ohpd.a41363
Back
Share Abstract:

Microhardness and SEM-EDX Analysis of Permanent Enamel Surface Adjacent to Fluoride-releasing Restorative Materials Under Severe Cariogenic Challenges

Neslihan Özveren / Şerife Özalp

Purpose: In this study, the protective effects of restorative materials with fluoride content, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), giomer, and glass carbomer against artificial initial caries lesions in a simulated highly cariogenic oral environment were evaluated. Considering the reported recharging abilities of these restorative materials, fluoridated toothpaste was applied to some groups, in which the anti-demineralising effect was also evaluated.

Materials and Methods: Two enamel blocks were produced from each of 60 sound permanent molars. Sixty specimens were used for microhardness analysis, and the rest were used for SEM-EDX analysis. Enamel specimens were randomly assigned to three groups according to the restorative material: A = resin-modified glass-ionomer cement; B = giomer; C = glass carbomer. Artificial initial caries lesions were created using demineralising solutions, after which specimens were exposed to in vitro pH cycling simulating a highly cariogenic oral environment. Microhardness and mineral analyses were performed on the enamel surrounding the restorative materials at three different times during the experiment: at the beginning of the experiment, then after the creation of the artificial early caries lesions, and finally after pH cycling.

Results: Microhardness and SEM-EDX results mostly confirmed each other. RMGIC and glass carbomer groups with added fluoride toothpaste showed statitsically significantly better anti-demineralising effects in comparison to other groups. Neither of the giomer groups performed as well as RMGIC or glass carbomer.

Conclusion: Because of the similarity between the demineralisation inhibitory activity of glass carbomer and RMGIC, glass carbomer may be preferred as a restorative material in paediatric dentistry.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
  © 2020 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog