Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the relevance of cations in different fluoride compounds for their effectiveness as anti-erosive agents. Human enamel samples underwent a de- and re-mineralisation procedure for 10 days. Erosive demineralisation was performed with 0.05 Mcitric acid (pH 2.3) 6 × 2 min daily followed by immersion in the test solution 6 × 2 min each. Test solutions were: SnCl<sub>2</sub> (815 ppm Sn; pH 2.6), NaF (250 ppm F; pH 3.5), SnF<sub>2</sub> (250 ppm F, 809 ppm Sn; pH 3.5), amine fluoride (AmF, 250 ppm F; pH 3.5), AmF/NaF (250 ppm F; pH 4.3), and AmF/SnF<sub>2</sub> (250 ppm F, 390 ppm Sn; pH 4.2). In the control group no fluoridation was performed. Mineral content was monitored by longitudinal microradiography. Finally, scanning electron microscopy was performed. The highest erosive mineral loss was found in the control group (48.0 ± 17.1 µm). Mineral loss was nearly completely inhibited by AmF/SnF<sub>2</sub> (5.7 ± 25.1 µm; p ≤ 0.001) and SnF<sub>2</sub> (–3.8 ± 14.4 µm; p ≤ 0.001) treatments. Groups treated with SnCl<sub>2</sub> (17.6 ± 19.5 µm; p ≤ 0.001) and NaF (13.2 ± 21.7 µm; p ≤ 0.001) showed a decrease in erosive mineral loss, AmF (41.6 ± 16.0 µm) and AmF/NaF (27.7 ± 28.4 µm) had no significant effect on erosion progression. The results indicate considerable differences between the fluoride compounds tested. Treatment with solutions containing SnF<sub>2</sub> was most effective.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.