Limits...
In vitro study of the potential protection of sound enamel against demineralization.

Montasser MA, El-Wassefy NA, Taha M - Prog Orthod (2015)

Bottom Line: Enamel was demineralized by subjecting the specimens to cycling between artificial saliva solution and a demineralizing solution for 21 days.The mean Vickers hardness in kgf/mm(2) was as follows: intact enamel = 352.5 ± 13.8, demineralized enamel = 301.6 ± 34.0, enamel treated with Clinpro = 333.6 ± 18.0, enamel treated with SEP = 370.7 ± 38.8, and enamel treated with ICON = 380.5 ± 53.8.Attempting to protect the enamel around the orthodontic brackets could be done by applying a preventive material before bonding, if not compromising the bond strength, the orthodontic brackets.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Orthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry 35516, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt, mmontasser11@yahoo.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: The objective of this study was to study the potential protection effect of different treatments against sound enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets.

Methods: This is an in vitro randomized controlled study; artificial enamel demineralization of human premolars was created and compared with reference to control. The three materials used for enamel treatment were resin infiltrate (ICON), fluoridated varnish (Clinpro), and the self-etch primer system (Transbond Plus Self-Etch Primer). Fifty premolars divided equally into five groups were included in the study for quantitative surface micro-hardness assessment using a micro-hardness tester (MHT). Qualitative assessment of the enamel demineralization with a polarized light microscope (PLM) was also used. Enamel was demineralized by subjecting the specimens to cycling between artificial saliva solution and a demineralizing solution for 21 days.

Results: The mean Vickers hardness in kgf/mm(2) was as follows: intact enamel = 352.5 ± 13.8, demineralized enamel = 301.6 ± 34.0, enamel treated with Clinpro = 333.6 ± 18.0, enamel treated with SEP = 370.7 ± 38.8, and enamel treated with ICON = 380.5 ± 53.8.

Conclusions: ICON, Clinpro, and Transbond Plus Self-Etch Primer (TPSEP) increased enamel resistance to demineralization. Attempting to protect the enamel around the orthodontic brackets could be done by applying a preventive material before bonding, if not compromising the bond strength, the orthodontic brackets.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean ± SD of the enamel hardness (kgf/mm2) of the five tested groups
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4440871&req=5

Fig1: Mean ± SD of the enamel hardness (kgf/mm2) of the five tested groups

Mentions: Descriptive statistics of the enamel hardness of each group are presented in Table 2 and Fig. 1. The demineralized untreated enamel group followed by the Clinpro group showed the lowest hardness values of the enamel surface. The ICON group, the SEP group, and the intact undemineralized enamel group showed the highest hardness values of the enamel surface in descending order.Table 2


In vitro study of the potential protection of sound enamel against demineralization.

Montasser MA, El-Wassefy NA, Taha M - Prog Orthod (2015)

Mean ± SD of the enamel hardness (kgf/mm2) of the five tested groups
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4440871&req=5

Fig1: Mean ± SD of the enamel hardness (kgf/mm2) of the five tested groups
Mentions: Descriptive statistics of the enamel hardness of each group are presented in Table 2 and Fig. 1. The demineralized untreated enamel group followed by the Clinpro group showed the lowest hardness values of the enamel surface. The ICON group, the SEP group, and the intact undemineralized enamel group showed the highest hardness values of the enamel surface in descending order.Table 2

Bottom Line: Enamel was demineralized by subjecting the specimens to cycling between artificial saliva solution and a demineralizing solution for 21 days.The mean Vickers hardness in kgf/mm(2) was as follows: intact enamel = 352.5 ± 13.8, demineralized enamel = 301.6 ± 34.0, enamel treated with Clinpro = 333.6 ± 18.0, enamel treated with SEP = 370.7 ± 38.8, and enamel treated with ICON = 380.5 ± 53.8.Attempting to protect the enamel around the orthodontic brackets could be done by applying a preventive material before bonding, if not compromising the bond strength, the orthodontic brackets.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Orthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry 35516, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt, mmontasser11@yahoo.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: The objective of this study was to study the potential protection effect of different treatments against sound enamel demineralization around orthodontic brackets.

Methods: This is an in vitro randomized controlled study; artificial enamel demineralization of human premolars was created and compared with reference to control. The three materials used for enamel treatment were resin infiltrate (ICON), fluoridated varnish (Clinpro), and the self-etch primer system (Transbond Plus Self-Etch Primer). Fifty premolars divided equally into five groups were included in the study for quantitative surface micro-hardness assessment using a micro-hardness tester (MHT). Qualitative assessment of the enamel demineralization with a polarized light microscope (PLM) was also used. Enamel was demineralized by subjecting the specimens to cycling between artificial saliva solution and a demineralizing solution for 21 days.

Results: The mean Vickers hardness in kgf/mm(2) was as follows: intact enamel = 352.5 ± 13.8, demineralized enamel = 301.6 ± 34.0, enamel treated with Clinpro = 333.6 ± 18.0, enamel treated with SEP = 370.7 ± 38.8, and enamel treated with ICON = 380.5 ± 53.8.

Conclusions: ICON, Clinpro, and Transbond Plus Self-Etch Primer (TPSEP) increased enamel resistance to demineralization. Attempting to protect the enamel around the orthodontic brackets could be done by applying a preventive material before bonding, if not compromising the bond strength, the orthodontic brackets.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus