In vitro caries lesion rehardening and enamel fluoride uptake from fluoride varnishes as a function of application mode

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To study the laboratory predicted anticaries efficacy of five commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) by determining their ability to reharden and to deliver fluoride to an early caries lesion when applied directly or in close vicinity to the lesion (halo effect). Methods: Early caries lesions were created in 80 polished bovine enamel specimens. Specimens were allocated to five FV groups (n=16) based on Knoop surface microhardness (KHN) after lesion creation. All tested FV claimed to contain 5% sodium fluoride and were: CavityShield, Enamel Pro, MI Varnish, Prevident and Vanish. FV were applied (10 ± 2 mg per lesion) to eight specimens per FV group (direct application); the remaining eight specimens received no FV but were later exposed to fluoride released from specimens which received a FV treatment (indirect application). Specimens were paired again and placed into containers (one per FV). Artificial saliva was added and containers placed into an incubator (27 hours at 37°C). Subsequently, FV was carefully removed using chloroform. Specimens were exposed to fresh artificial saliva again (67 hours at 37°C). KHN was measured and differences to baseline values calculated. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using the acid etch technique. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results: The two-way ANOVA highlighted significant interactions between FV vs. application mode, for both △KHN and EFU (P<0.001). All FV were able to reharden and deliver fluoride to caries lesions, but to different degrees. Furthermore, considerable differences were found for both variables between FV when applied either directly or in close vicinity to the lesion: MI Varnish and Enamel Pro exhibited greater fluoride efficacy when applied in vicinity rather than directly to the lesion, whereas CavityShield and Vanish did not differ. Prevident exhibited a higher EFU when applied directly, but little difference in rehardening.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)81-85
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Dentistry
Volume26
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Topical Fluorides
Dental Enamel
Fluorides
Artificial Saliva
Paint
In Vitro Techniques
Analysis of Variance
Epidemiologic Effect Modifiers
Incubators
Sodium Fluoride
Chloroform

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{c6c59a8653c7408199df0786651bed47,
title = "In vitro caries lesion rehardening and enamel fluoride uptake from fluoride varnishes as a function of application mode",
abstract = "Purpose: To study the laboratory predicted anticaries efficacy of five commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) by determining their ability to reharden and to deliver fluoride to an early caries lesion when applied directly or in close vicinity to the lesion (halo effect). Methods: Early caries lesions were created in 80 polished bovine enamel specimens. Specimens were allocated to five FV groups (n=16) based on Knoop surface microhardness (KHN) after lesion creation. All tested FV claimed to contain 5{\%} sodium fluoride and were: CavityShield, Enamel Pro, MI Varnish, Prevident and Vanish. FV were applied (10 ± 2 mg per lesion) to eight specimens per FV group (direct application); the remaining eight specimens received no FV but were later exposed to fluoride released from specimens which received a FV treatment (indirect application). Specimens were paired again and placed into containers (one per FV). Artificial saliva was added and containers placed into an incubator (27 hours at 37°C). Subsequently, FV was carefully removed using chloroform. Specimens were exposed to fresh artificial saliva again (67 hours at 37°C). KHN was measured and differences to baseline values calculated. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using the acid etch technique. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results: The two-way ANOVA highlighted significant interactions between FV vs. application mode, for both △KHN and EFU (P<0.001). All FV were able to reharden and deliver fluoride to caries lesions, but to different degrees. Furthermore, considerable differences were found for both variables between FV when applied either directly or in close vicinity to the lesion: MI Varnish and Enamel Pro exhibited greater fluoride efficacy when applied in vicinity rather than directly to the lesion, whereas CavityShield and Vanish did not differ. Prevident exhibited a higher EFU when applied directly, but little difference in rehardening.",
author = "Frank Lippert and Anderson Hara and {Martinez Mier}, Esperanza and Domenick Zero",
year = "2013",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "81--85",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In vitro caries lesion rehardening and enamel fluoride uptake from fluoride varnishes as a function of application mode

AU - Lippert, Frank

AU - Hara, Anderson

AU - Martinez Mier, Esperanza

AU - Zero, Domenick

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Purpose: To study the laboratory predicted anticaries efficacy of five commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) by determining their ability to reharden and to deliver fluoride to an early caries lesion when applied directly or in close vicinity to the lesion (halo effect). Methods: Early caries lesions were created in 80 polished bovine enamel specimens. Specimens were allocated to five FV groups (n=16) based on Knoop surface microhardness (KHN) after lesion creation. All tested FV claimed to contain 5% sodium fluoride and were: CavityShield, Enamel Pro, MI Varnish, Prevident and Vanish. FV were applied (10 ± 2 mg per lesion) to eight specimens per FV group (direct application); the remaining eight specimens received no FV but were later exposed to fluoride released from specimens which received a FV treatment (indirect application). Specimens were paired again and placed into containers (one per FV). Artificial saliva was added and containers placed into an incubator (27 hours at 37°C). Subsequently, FV was carefully removed using chloroform. Specimens were exposed to fresh artificial saliva again (67 hours at 37°C). KHN was measured and differences to baseline values calculated. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using the acid etch technique. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results: The two-way ANOVA highlighted significant interactions between FV vs. application mode, for both △KHN and EFU (P<0.001). All FV were able to reharden and deliver fluoride to caries lesions, but to different degrees. Furthermore, considerable differences were found for both variables between FV when applied either directly or in close vicinity to the lesion: MI Varnish and Enamel Pro exhibited greater fluoride efficacy when applied in vicinity rather than directly to the lesion, whereas CavityShield and Vanish did not differ. Prevident exhibited a higher EFU when applied directly, but little difference in rehardening.

AB - Purpose: To study the laboratory predicted anticaries efficacy of five commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) by determining their ability to reharden and to deliver fluoride to an early caries lesion when applied directly or in close vicinity to the lesion (halo effect). Methods: Early caries lesions were created in 80 polished bovine enamel specimens. Specimens were allocated to five FV groups (n=16) based on Knoop surface microhardness (KHN) after lesion creation. All tested FV claimed to contain 5% sodium fluoride and were: CavityShield, Enamel Pro, MI Varnish, Prevident and Vanish. FV were applied (10 ± 2 mg per lesion) to eight specimens per FV group (direct application); the remaining eight specimens received no FV but were later exposed to fluoride released from specimens which received a FV treatment (indirect application). Specimens were paired again and placed into containers (one per FV). Artificial saliva was added and containers placed into an incubator (27 hours at 37°C). Subsequently, FV was carefully removed using chloroform. Specimens were exposed to fresh artificial saliva again (67 hours at 37°C). KHN was measured and differences to baseline values calculated. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using the acid etch technique. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results: The two-way ANOVA highlighted significant interactions between FV vs. application mode, for both △KHN and EFU (P<0.001). All FV were able to reharden and deliver fluoride to caries lesions, but to different degrees. Furthermore, considerable differences were found for both variables between FV when applied either directly or in close vicinity to the lesion: MI Varnish and Enamel Pro exhibited greater fluoride efficacy when applied in vicinity rather than directly to the lesion, whereas CavityShield and Vanish did not differ. Prevident exhibited a higher EFU when applied directly, but little difference in rehardening.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879579779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879579779&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 24073530

AN - SCOPUS:84879579779

VL - 26

SP - 81

EP - 85

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 2

ER -