Literature DB >> 15302455

A continuous flow system for assessing fluoride release/uptake of fluoride-containing restorative materials.

Hsiu-Ming Hsu1, Guay-Fen Huang, Hsiao-Hua Chang, Yin-Lin Wang, Ming-Kuang Guo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop a continuous flow system to mimic the kinetics of salivary flow in the mouth and to study the fluoride (F) release/uptake characteristics of both a conventional (Fuji IX) and a resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer) in such system.
METHODS: Five discs were made for each material. The disc was suspended in a drip chamber sustaining 2 ml of deionized water. The flow rate was controlled at 20 ml/h by an infusion pump. The F release in the drip chamber was assessed at designated time points for up to 6 days. The discs were subjected to 1 min exposures of 0.2% sodium fluoride (NaF); the F re-release was assessed for another 12 h.
RESULTS: Following a brief initial burst of F release, the rate decreased rapidly. Vitremer reached a steady low after 8 h, while Fuji IX reached a steady low after 90 min. Cumulative F release was measured from both the effluence and the drip chamber and showed that Vitremer released and took up more F than Fuji IX, both before and after F treatment. Cumulative amounts of fluoride in the drip chamber were much less than that in the effluence. The daily release rate patterns from the two materials were parallel. However, the hourly release rate of Vitremer decreased more gradually than Fuji IX. After sodium fluoride (NaF) treatment, F can be recharged easily and re-released rapidly within 90 min.
CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the continuous flow method can be used to assess F release/uptake of the material. This method may represent a closer model to in vivo conditions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15302455     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2003.10.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  7 in total

1.  Recharge pattern of contemporary glass ionomer restoratives.

Authors:  Farahnaz Arbabzadeh-Zavareh; Tim Gibbs; Ian A Meyers; Majid Bouzari; Shiva Mortazavi; Laurence J Walsh
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2012-03

2.  Do conventional glass ionomer cements release more fluoride than resin-modified glass ionomer cements?

Authors:  Maria Fernanda Costa Cabral; Roberto Luiz de Menezes Martinho; Manoel Valcácio Guedes-Neto; Maria Augusta Bessa Rebelo; Danielson Guedes Pontes; Flávia Cohen-Carneiro
Journal:  Restor Dent Endod       Date:  2015-05-26

3.  Fluoride and aluminum release from restorative materials using ion chromatography.

Authors:  Zeynep Okte; Sule Bayrak; Ulvi Reha Fidanci; Tevhide Sel
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.698

4.  Fluoride release from two types of fluoride-containing orthodontic adhesives: Conventional versus resin-modified glass ionomer cements-An in vitro study.

Authors:  Yasemin Dziuk; Sachin Chhatwani; Stephan C Möhlhenrich; Sabrina Tulka; Ella A Naumova; Gholamreza Danesh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Development of antibacterial composite resin containing chitosan/fluoride microparticles as pit and fissure sealant to prevent caries.

Authors:  Chun-Cheng Lai; Chun-Pin Lin; Yin-Lin Wang
Journal:  J Oral Microbiol       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 5.474

6.  Fluoride content and recharge ability of five glassionomer dental materials.

Authors:  Dejan Lj Markovic; Bojan B Petrovic; Tamara O Peric
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2008-07-28       Impact factor: 2.757

Review 7.  A Review of Glass-Ionomer Cements for Clinical Dentistry.

Authors:  Sharanbir K Sidhu; John W Nicholson
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2016-06-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.