1992
DOI: 10.1159/000261418
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of Fluoride and pH on in vitro Remineralization of Bovine Enamel

Abstract: Subsurface lesions in bovine enamel slices were remineralized. The remineralization solutions contained either 0.03,0.3, or 1.0 ppm fluoride at either pH 5.5 or 6.8. The amount of remineralization was determined after periods of up to 610 h, using quantitative microradiography. The results showed that after 126 h of remineralization in the presence of 0.03 ppm fluoride significantly (p < 0.05) more remineralization occurred at pH 6.8 than at pH 5.5. At 0.3 and 1.0 ppm fluoride no significant differences betwee… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
15
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Significant protection occurs at 2 ppm or more. Recently, ten Cate (1990) and Lammers et al (1992) confirmed previous reports that low concentrations of F present during enamel demineralization promoted remineralization and significantly limited mineral loss. Pearce et al (1992) also tested the Fplus-sucrose mix on plaque-induced demineralization using intra-oral testing procedures with the 0, 1,2, and 5 ppm F in 10% sucrose.…”
Section: Effect Of F Concentration On Enamel Hardnesssupporting
confidence: 60%
“…Significant protection occurs at 2 ppm or more. Recently, ten Cate (1990) and Lammers et al (1992) confirmed previous reports that low concentrations of F present during enamel demineralization promoted remineralization and significantly limited mineral loss. Pearce et al (1992) also tested the Fplus-sucrose mix on plaque-induced demineralization using intra-oral testing procedures with the 0, 1,2, and 5 ppm F in 10% sucrose.…”
Section: Effect Of F Concentration On Enamel Hardnesssupporting
confidence: 60%
“…This finding indicates that a major part of the remineralization resulted from migration and redeposition of ions from the ACP and not from the immersion solution. This remineralization was comparable with or greater than the in vitro remineralization of subsurface bovine enamel lesions treated with remineralizing solutions containing different levels of fluoride [A(AZ) ± standard deviation = 46% ± 14% and 71% + 18%, respectively, for 0.3 pg/g and 1 pg/g fluoride containing RS at pH 6.8 (Lammers et al, 1992a), and from 21°% + 7%o to 33% + 7%0 for fluoride concentrations between 0.03 pg/g and 1 }ag/g and pH 5.5 (Lammers et al, 1992b)]. In contrast, net remineralization obtained with ACPcomposites under the pH-cycling dynamic regimen was generally lower than the remineralization achieved with different fluoride treatments under similar conditions [A(AZ) = 721% + 15%, Damato et al, 1988; A(AZ) = 82% ± 6%, White and Featherstone, 1987; A(AZ) = 87% ± 9%, Featherstone et al, 1988; A(AZ) = 46% ± 23% and A(AZ) -94"/o + 43"/, Chow et al, 1992].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…After 6 h, the pH levels were decreased in the different groups. However, CPB showed the highest pH values, which may have been due to the presence of fluoride in the formulation (Moszner et al 2005;Van Landuyt et al 2007), which has been shown to influence pH (Lammers et al 1992). However, after 24 h, CPB displayed lower pH values.…”
Section: Anti-biofouling Testing: Changes In the Ph Of The Mediamentioning
confidence: 96%