Cargando…

Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization

This study evaluated the effects of fluoride on subsurface enamel demineralization induced by two commonly used chemical models. Forty-eight enamel blocks were demineralized at pH = 5.0 by an acetate buffer (Group 1), a lactate buffer (Group 2), an acetate buffer with 0.02 ppm fluoride (Group 3) and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Ollie Yiru, Mei, May Lei, Zhao, Irene Shuping, Lo, Edward Chin-Man, Chu, Chun-Hung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706192/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29077034
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma10111245
_version_ 1783282175669436416
author Yu, Ollie Yiru
Mei, May Lei
Zhao, Irene Shuping
Lo, Edward Chin-Man
Chu, Chun-Hung
author_facet Yu, Ollie Yiru
Mei, May Lei
Zhao, Irene Shuping
Lo, Edward Chin-Man
Chu, Chun-Hung
author_sort Yu, Ollie Yiru
collection PubMed
description This study evaluated the effects of fluoride on subsurface enamel demineralization induced by two commonly used chemical models. Forty-eight enamel blocks were demineralized at pH = 5.0 by an acetate buffer (Group 1), a lactate buffer (Group 2), an acetate buffer with 0.02 ppm fluoride (Group 3) and a lactate buffer with 0.02 ppm fluoride (Group 4) at 25 °C for 3 weeks. The surface destruction percentage (SDP), mineral loss and lesion depth of the blocks were studied using micro-computed tomography. An elemental analysis of the enamel surface was evaluated using an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Surface micro-hardness was determined by the Knoop Hardness Test. The mean lesion depth of Groups 1 through 4 were 134.1 ± 27.2 μm, 96.1 ± 16.5 μm, 97.5 ± 22.4 μm and 91.1 ± 16.2 μm, respectively (p < 0.001; group 1 > 2, 3 > 4). The SDPs of groups 1 through 4 were 7.8 ± 8.93%, 0.71 ± 1.6%, 0.36 ± 1.70% and 1.36 ± 2.94% (p < 0.001; group 1 > 2, 3, 4). The fluoride in mean weight percentages of groups 1 through 4 were 1.12 ± 0.24%, 1.10 ± 0.20%, 1.45 ± 0.40% and 1.51 ± 0.51%, respectively (p < 0.001; group 3, 4 > 1, 2). The mean Knoop hardness values of groups 1 through 4 were 27.5 ± 13.3, 39.7 ± 19.3, 73.6 ± 44.2 and 91.0 ± 57.2, respectively (p < 0.001; group 4 > 3 > 2 > 1). The chemical model using an acetate buffer solution created significantly deeper zones of subsurface demineralization on enamel than the lactate buffer solution. An acetate buffer may damage the enamel surface, but the surface damage can be prevented by adding fluoride.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5706192
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57061922017-12-04 Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization Yu, Ollie Yiru Mei, May Lei Zhao, Irene Shuping Lo, Edward Chin-Man Chu, Chun-Hung Materials (Basel) Article This study evaluated the effects of fluoride on subsurface enamel demineralization induced by two commonly used chemical models. Forty-eight enamel blocks were demineralized at pH = 5.0 by an acetate buffer (Group 1), a lactate buffer (Group 2), an acetate buffer with 0.02 ppm fluoride (Group 3) and a lactate buffer with 0.02 ppm fluoride (Group 4) at 25 °C for 3 weeks. The surface destruction percentage (SDP), mineral loss and lesion depth of the blocks were studied using micro-computed tomography. An elemental analysis of the enamel surface was evaluated using an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Surface micro-hardness was determined by the Knoop Hardness Test. The mean lesion depth of Groups 1 through 4 were 134.1 ± 27.2 μm, 96.1 ± 16.5 μm, 97.5 ± 22.4 μm and 91.1 ± 16.2 μm, respectively (p < 0.001; group 1 > 2, 3 > 4). The SDPs of groups 1 through 4 were 7.8 ± 8.93%, 0.71 ± 1.6%, 0.36 ± 1.70% and 1.36 ± 2.94% (p < 0.001; group 1 > 2, 3, 4). The fluoride in mean weight percentages of groups 1 through 4 were 1.12 ± 0.24%, 1.10 ± 0.20%, 1.45 ± 0.40% and 1.51 ± 0.51%, respectively (p < 0.001; group 3, 4 > 1, 2). The mean Knoop hardness values of groups 1 through 4 were 27.5 ± 13.3, 39.7 ± 19.3, 73.6 ± 44.2 and 91.0 ± 57.2, respectively (p < 0.001; group 4 > 3 > 2 > 1). The chemical model using an acetate buffer solution created significantly deeper zones of subsurface demineralization on enamel than the lactate buffer solution. An acetate buffer may damage the enamel surface, but the surface damage can be prevented by adding fluoride. MDPI 2017-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5706192/ /pubmed/29077034 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma10111245 Text en © 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Yu, Ollie Yiru
Mei, May Lei
Zhao, Irene Shuping
Lo, Edward Chin-Man
Chu, Chun-Hung
Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title_full Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title_fullStr Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title_full_unstemmed Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title_short Effects of Fluoride on Two Chemical Models of Enamel Demineralization
title_sort effects of fluoride on two chemical models of enamel demineralization
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706192/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29077034
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma10111245
work_keys_str_mv AT yuollieyiru effectsoffluorideontwochemicalmodelsofenameldemineralization
AT meimaylei effectsoffluorideontwochemicalmodelsofenameldemineralization
AT zhaoireneshuping effectsoffluorideontwochemicalmodelsofenameldemineralization
AT loedwardchinman effectsoffluorideontwochemicalmodelsofenameldemineralization
AT chuchunhung effectsoffluorideontwochemicalmodelsofenameldemineralization