Effect of fluoride varnishes on eroded enamel by atomic force microscopy: In vitro study

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of different fluoride varnishes on eroded enamel through Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Materials and Methods: 30 samples of bovine incisor enamel without carious lesions, defective structure or fractures were divided into 3 groups (N = 10): G1: negative control, G2:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Rodríguez Rocha, Diana Verónica, Bonilla, Pablo, Tello, Gustavo
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2018
País:Ecuador
Institución:Universidad Central del Ecuador
Repositorio:Revista Odontología
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:revistadigital.uce.edu.ec:article/1101
Acceso en línea:https://revistadigital.uce.edu.ec/index.php/odontologia/article/view/1101
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Erosión dental
esmalte dental
flúor
Dental erosion
dental enamel
fluorine
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: To evaluate the effect of different fluoride varnishes on eroded enamel through Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Materials and Methods: 30 samples of bovine incisor enamel without carious lesions, defective structure or fractures were divided into 3 groups (N = 10): G1: negative control, G2: Duraphat® (Colgate) and G3: Clinpro™ White Varnish (3M ESPE). The AFM was used, equipped with a non-contact tip with parameters such as average roughness (Ra) and the mean square roughness (Rrms) at an area for images of 50 x 50 microns with a resolution of 256 X 256 pixels and 0.5 Hz. First, the initial roughness was measured, then an erosive trail was carried out with Sprite Zero and remineralization with artificial saliva. After 4 cycles of erosion and remineralization, the roughness of enamel as mechanic protection was measured and at 1, 2, 3 and 4 days as chemical protection. Data were analyzed statistically with ANOVA, Tukey and Student T with a significance level of 5%. Results: The ANOVA test showed a difference in the groups of fluoride varnishes on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th day in comparison with the control group (p <0.05). The Tukey test showed a difference between Duraphat® and Clinpro™ in the values of Ra (p = 0.03) and Rrms (p = 0.05) on the 4th day. The Student’s T test showed no difference for Clinpro™ in Ra (p = 0.14) and Rrms (0.13) from the initial values until 4th day. Conclusion: Clinpro™ White Varnish shows better results to reduce surface roughness in the enamel when subjected to acidic trails.