No abstract

The aims of this study were: (1) to correlate surface (SH) and cross-sectional hardness (CSH) with microradiographic parameters of artificial enamel lesions; (2) to compare lesions prepared by different protocols. Fifty bovine enamel specimens were allocated by stratified randomisation according to their initial SH values to five groups and lesions produced by different methods: MC gel (methylcellulose gel/lactic acid, pH 4.6, 14 days); PA gel (polyacrylic acid/lactic acid/hydroxyapatite, pH 4.8, 16 h); MHDP (undersaturated lactate buffer/methyl diphosphonate, pH 5.0, 6 days); buffer (undersaturated acetate buffer/fluoride, pH 5.0, 16 h), and pH cycling (7 days). SH of the lesions (SH₁) was measured. The specimens were longitudinally sectioned and transverse microradiography (TMR) and CSH measured at 10- to 220-μm depth from the surface. Overall, there was a medium correlation but non-linear and variable relationship between mineral content and √CSH. √SH₁ was weakly to moderately correlated with surface layer properties, weakly correlated with lesion depth but uncorrelated with integrated mineral loss. MHDP lesions showed the highest subsurface mineral loss, followed by pH cycling, buffer, PA gel and MC gel lesions. The conclusions were: (1) CSH, as an alternative to TMR, does not estimate mineral content very accurately, but gives information about mechanical properties of lesions; (2) SH should not be used to analyse lesions; (3) artificial caries lesions produced by the protocols differ, especially considering the method of analysis.

Objective This study assessed the effect of fluoride varnishes on the progression of tooth erosion in vitro. Material and Methods: Forty-eight enamel and 60 root dentin samples were previously demineralized (0.1% citric acid, pH 2.5, 30 min), leading to a baseline and erosive wear of 12.9 and 11.4 µm, respectively. The samples were randomly treated (6 h) with a 4% TiF4 varnish (2.45%F-, pH 1.0), a 5.42% NaF varnish (2.45%F-, pH 5.0), a placebo varnish and no varnish (control). The samples were then subjected to erosive pH cycles (4x90 s/day in 0.1% citric acid, intercalated with artificial saliva) for 5 days. The increment of the erosive tooth wear was calculated. In the case of dentin, this final measurement was done with and without the demineralized organic matrix (DOM). Enamel and dentin data were analyzed using ANOVA/Tukey’s and Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn tests, respectively (p<0.05).Results The TiF4 (mean±s.d: 1.5±1.1 µm) and NaF (2.1±1.7 µm) varnishes significantly reduced enamel wear progression compared to the placebo varnish (3.9±1.1 µm) and control (4.5±0.9 µm). The same differences were found for dentin in the presence and absence of the DOM, respectively: TiF4 (average: 0.97/1.87 µm), NaF (1.03/2.13 µm), placebo varnish (3.53/4.47 µm) and control (3.53/4.36 µm).Conclusion The TiF4 and NaF varnishes were equally effective in reducing the progression of tooth erosion in vitro.

This study evaluated the effect of titanium tetrafluoride (TiF(4)) formulations on enamel carious demineralization in situ. Thirteen subjects took part in this cross-over, split-mouth, double-blind study performed in three phases of 14 d each. In each subject, two sound and two predemineralized specimens of bovine enamel were worn intra-orally and plaque accumulation was allowed. One sound and one predemineralized specimen in each subject was treated once with sodium fluoride (NaF) varnish or solution (Treatment A); TiF(4) varnish or solution (Treatment B); or placebo varnish or no treatment (Treatment C). The initially sound enamel specimens were exposed to severe cariogenic challenge (20% sucrose, eight times daily for 5 min each time), whereas the predemineralized specimens were not. Eleven subjects were able to finish all experimental phases. The enamel alterations were quantified by surface hardness and transversal microradiography. Demineralization of previously sound enamel was reduced by all test formulations except for the NaF solution, while both TiF(4) formulations were as effective as NaF varnish. For the predemineralized specimens, enamel surface hardness was increased only by TiF(4) formulations, while subsurface mineral remineralization could not be seen in any group. Within the experimental protocol, TiF(4) was able to decrease enamel demineralization to a similar degree as NaF varnish under severe cariogenic challenges, while only TiF(4) formulations remineralized the enamel surface.

OBJECTIVE. Previous in vitro study has shown that TiF(4) varnish might reduce enamel erosion. No data regarding the effect of this experimental varnish on enamel erosion plus abrasion, however, are available so far. Thus, this in vitro study aimed to analyse the effect of TiF(4) compared with NaF varnishes and solutions, to protect against enamel erosion with or without abrasion. METHODS. Enamel specimens were pre-treated with experimental-TiF(4) (2.45% F), experimental-NaF (2.45% F), NaF-Duraphat (2.26% F), and placebo varnishes; NaF (2.26% F) and TiF(4) (2.45% F) solutions. Controls remained untreated. The erosive challenge was performed using a soft drink (pH 2.6) 4 × 90 s/day (ERO) and the toothbrushing abrasion (ERO+ABR) 2 × 10 s/day, for 5 days. Between the challenges, the specimens were exposed to artificial saliva. Enamel loss was measured profilometrically (μm). RESULTS. Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn tests showed that all fluoridated varnishes (TiF(4) -ERO:0.53 ± 0.20, ERO+ABR:0.65 ± 0.19/NaF-ERO:0.94 ± 0.18, ERO+ABR:1.74 ± 0.37/Duraphat-ERO:1.00 ± 0.37, ERO+ABR:1.72 ± 0.58) were able to significantly reduce enamel loss when compared with placebo varnish (ERO:3.45 ± 0.41/ERO+ABR:3.20 ± 0.66) (P < 0.0001). Placebo varnish, control (ERO:2.68 ± 0.53/ERO+ABR:3.01 ± 0.34), and fluoridated (NaF-ERO:2.84 ± 0.09/ERO+ABR:2.40 ± 0.21/TiF(4) -ERO:3.55 ± 0.59/ERO+ABR:4.10 ± 0.38) solutions did not significantly differ from each other. CONCLUSION. Based on the results, it can be concluded that the TiF(4) varnish seems to be a promising treatment to reduce enamel loss under mild erosive and abrasive conditions in vitro.