Frank Lippert1, Anderson Takeo Hara2, Esperanza Angeles Martinez-Mier2, Domenick T Zero2. 1. Department of Preventive and Community Dentistry, Oral Health Research Institute, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, Ind., USA. flippert@iu.edu. 2. Department of Preventive and Community Dentistry, Oral Health Research Institute, Indiana University School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, Ind., USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential anticaries efficacy of fluoride varnishes (FVs) by studying their ability to reharden and deliver fluoride to carious lesions and to release fluoride into saliva. METHODS: Enamel carious lesions were created and allocated to 24 groups (11 FVs with two FV incubation times and two control groups) based on Knoop microhardness test values. FVs were applied to lesions, which were incubated in artificial saliva for two or six hours, with saliva being renewed hourly. FV was removed and lesions were remineralized in artificial saliva for 22 hours. Microhardness was measured and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined. Saliva samples (six-hour groups) were analyzed to determine fluoride release characteristics. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance. RESULTS: FVs differed considerably in their ability to reharden and deliver fluoride to carious lesions and in their fluoride release characteristics. Little consistency was found between investigated study variables for virtually all tested FVs. For example, a particular FV showed the highest EFU and fluoride release values but the lowest rehardening value. A longer FV contact time led to increased EFU for five of the 11 FVs. Some FVs delivered more fluoride to lesions in two hours than others did in six hours. CONCLUSION: Fluoride varnishes differ greatly in their in vitro anticaries efficacy.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential anticaries efficacy of fluoride varnishes (FVs) by studying their ability to reharden and deliver fluoride to carious lesions and to release fluoride into saliva. METHODS: Enamel carious lesions were created and allocated to 24 groups (11 FVs with two FV incubation times and two control groups) based on Knoop microhardness test values. FVs were applied to lesions, which were incubated in artificial saliva for two or six hours, with saliva being renewed hourly. FV was removed and lesions were remineralized in artificial saliva for 22 hours. Microhardness was measured and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined. Saliva samples (six-hour groups) were analyzed to determine fluoride release characteristics. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance. RESULTS: FVs differed considerably in their ability to reharden and deliver fluoride to carious lesions and in their fluoride release characteristics. Little consistency was found between investigated study variables for virtually all tested FVs. For example, a particular FV showed the highest EFU and fluoride release values but the lowest rehardening value. A longer FV contact time led to increased EFU for five of the 11 FVs. Some FVs delivered more fluoride to lesions in two hours than others did in six hours. CONCLUSION:Fluoride varnishes differ greatly in their in vitro anticaries efficacy.
Authors: Steffi N Dhillon; Anshula N Deshpande; Chirag Macwan; Kinjal S Patel; Yash S Shah; Aishwarya A Jain Journal: Int J Clin Pediatr Dent Date: 2020