Effect of a pulsed CO2 laser and fluoride on the prevention of enamel and dentine erosion

Carolina Steiner-Oliveira, Marinês Nobre-dos-Santos, Domenick Zero, George Eckert, Anderson Hara

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

51 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The hypotheses of this study was that pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) treatment in combination (or not) with previous fluoride gel application could increase the resistance of enamel and dentine to erosion, throughout successive erosive challenges. Design: Thirty-two bovine specimens of enamel and of root dentine were flattened, polished and randomly assigned to the following treatments (n = 8): fluoride (F), laser (L), fluoride + laser (FL) or no treatment as negative control (C). The treated specimens were submitted to demineralization (0.3% citric acid, pH 2.45, for 5 min) and remineralization (artificial saliva, for 60 min) cycles, three times a day, for 3 days. Dental surface loss as well as the concentration of calcium, phosphorus and fluoride in the demineralizing solutions were determined after each cycling day. Enamel and dentine were analysed separately using repeated measures ANOVA for ranks (α = 0.05). Results: The association between fluoride and laser (FL) resulted in the lowest enamel and dentine surface loss values throughout the cycles, differing significantly from the control group. No clear benefit of FL over the F or L treatments was observed. There was a non-significant trend (p > 0.05) for FL to release less calcium, phosphorus and fluoride into the demineralizing solutions when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: Pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) alone was not able to prevent enamel or dentine surface losses due to erosion. Laser treatment in combination with fluoride showed some protection, but the effect does not appear to be synergistic.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)127-133
Number of pages7
JournalArchives of Oral Biology
Volume55
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2010

Fingerprint

Gas Lasers
Dentin
Dental Enamel
Fluorides
Lasers
Calcium Fluoride
Phosphorus
Artificial Saliva
Tooth Loss
Citric Acid
Analysis of Variance
Gels
Control Groups

Keywords

  • Calcium
  • CO laser
  • Dentine
  • Enamel
  • Fluoride
  • Phosphorus
  • Profilometry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Cell Biology
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Effect of a pulsed CO2 laser and fluoride on the prevention of enamel and dentine erosion. / Steiner-Oliveira, Carolina; Nobre-dos-Santos, Marinês; Zero, Domenick; Eckert, George; Hara, Anderson.

In: Archives of Oral Biology, Vol. 55, No. 2, 02.2010, p. 127-133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Steiner-Oliveira, Carolina ; Nobre-dos-Santos, Marinês ; Zero, Domenick ; Eckert, George ; Hara, Anderson. / Effect of a pulsed CO2 laser and fluoride on the prevention of enamel and dentine erosion. In: Archives of Oral Biology. 2010 ; Vol. 55, No. 2. pp. 127-133.
@article{5e5a82012df44470a2bc4deb2387df10,
title = "Effect of a pulsed CO2 laser and fluoride on the prevention of enamel and dentine erosion",
abstract = "Objective: The hypotheses of this study was that pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) treatment in combination (or not) with previous fluoride gel application could increase the resistance of enamel and dentine to erosion, throughout successive erosive challenges. Design: Thirty-two bovine specimens of enamel and of root dentine were flattened, polished and randomly assigned to the following treatments (n = 8): fluoride (F), laser (L), fluoride + laser (FL) or no treatment as negative control (C). The treated specimens were submitted to demineralization (0.3{\%} citric acid, pH 2.45, for 5 min) and remineralization (artificial saliva, for 60 min) cycles, three times a day, for 3 days. Dental surface loss as well as the concentration of calcium, phosphorus and fluoride in the demineralizing solutions were determined after each cycling day. Enamel and dentine were analysed separately using repeated measures ANOVA for ranks (α = 0.05). Results: The association between fluoride and laser (FL) resulted in the lowest enamel and dentine surface loss values throughout the cycles, differing significantly from the control group. No clear benefit of FL over the F or L treatments was observed. There was a non-significant trend (p > 0.05) for FL to release less calcium, phosphorus and fluoride into the demineralizing solutions when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: Pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) alone was not able to prevent enamel or dentine surface losses due to erosion. Laser treatment in combination with fluoride showed some protection, but the effect does not appear to be synergistic.",
keywords = "Calcium, CO laser, Dentine, Enamel, Fluoride, Phosphorus, Profilometry",
author = "Carolina Steiner-Oliveira and Marin{\^e}s Nobre-dos-Santos and Domenick Zero and George Eckert and Anderson Hara",
year = "2010",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.11.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "55",
pages = "127--133",
journal = "Archives of Oral Biology",
issn = "0003-9969",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of a pulsed CO2 laser and fluoride on the prevention of enamel and dentine erosion

AU - Steiner-Oliveira, Carolina

AU - Nobre-dos-Santos, Marinês

AU - Zero, Domenick

AU - Eckert, George

AU - Hara, Anderson

PY - 2010/2

Y1 - 2010/2

N2 - Objective: The hypotheses of this study was that pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) treatment in combination (or not) with previous fluoride gel application could increase the resistance of enamel and dentine to erosion, throughout successive erosive challenges. Design: Thirty-two bovine specimens of enamel and of root dentine were flattened, polished and randomly assigned to the following treatments (n = 8): fluoride (F), laser (L), fluoride + laser (FL) or no treatment as negative control (C). The treated specimens were submitted to demineralization (0.3% citric acid, pH 2.45, for 5 min) and remineralization (artificial saliva, for 60 min) cycles, three times a day, for 3 days. Dental surface loss as well as the concentration of calcium, phosphorus and fluoride in the demineralizing solutions were determined after each cycling day. Enamel and dentine were analysed separately using repeated measures ANOVA for ranks (α = 0.05). Results: The association between fluoride and laser (FL) resulted in the lowest enamel and dentine surface loss values throughout the cycles, differing significantly from the control group. No clear benefit of FL over the F or L treatments was observed. There was a non-significant trend (p > 0.05) for FL to release less calcium, phosphorus and fluoride into the demineralizing solutions when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: Pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) alone was not able to prevent enamel or dentine surface losses due to erosion. Laser treatment in combination with fluoride showed some protection, but the effect does not appear to be synergistic.

AB - Objective: The hypotheses of this study was that pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) treatment in combination (or not) with previous fluoride gel application could increase the resistance of enamel and dentine to erosion, throughout successive erosive challenges. Design: Thirty-two bovine specimens of enamel and of root dentine were flattened, polished and randomly assigned to the following treatments (n = 8): fluoride (F), laser (L), fluoride + laser (FL) or no treatment as negative control (C). The treated specimens were submitted to demineralization (0.3% citric acid, pH 2.45, for 5 min) and remineralization (artificial saliva, for 60 min) cycles, three times a day, for 3 days. Dental surface loss as well as the concentration of calcium, phosphorus and fluoride in the demineralizing solutions were determined after each cycling day. Enamel and dentine were analysed separately using repeated measures ANOVA for ranks (α = 0.05). Results: The association between fluoride and laser (FL) resulted in the lowest enamel and dentine surface loss values throughout the cycles, differing significantly from the control group. No clear benefit of FL over the F or L treatments was observed. There was a non-significant trend (p > 0.05) for FL to release less calcium, phosphorus and fluoride into the demineralizing solutions when compared to the other groups. Conclusions: Pulsed CO2 laser (λ = 10.6 μm) alone was not able to prevent enamel or dentine surface losses due to erosion. Laser treatment in combination with fluoride showed some protection, but the effect does not appear to be synergistic.

KW - Calcium

KW - CO laser

KW - Dentine

KW - Enamel

KW - Fluoride

KW - Phosphorus

KW - Profilometry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=74449089619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=74449089619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.11.010

DO - 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.11.010

M3 - Article

VL - 55

SP - 127

EP - 133

JO - Archives of Oral Biology

JF - Archives of Oral Biology

SN - 0003-9969

IS - 2

ER -