2009•Di-san junyi daxue xuebaoRequires access

An in vitro study on inhibition of enamel demineralization by fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant

Jinhua Wang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To compare the inhibitory effect of fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant on enamel demineralization in vitro.Methods Thirty noncarious human third molars extracted were randomly divided into 3 groups with 10 in each.Cavity was placed on buccal surfaces of the molars,then filled with fluoride-releasing resin sealant(ClinproTMsealant),glass ionomer sealant(Fuji Ⅸ GP)or non-fluoride-releasing resin sealant(Concise).After thermocycling for 300 cycles,the surface microhardness of sound enamel 1 mm away from sealant-filled cavities in each group was measured.Then after the treated molars were placed in an artificial demineralizing solution for a week,their surface microhardness was detected again.Results The mean reduction of surface microhardness was(87.30±23.84)HV for ClinproTM sealant group,(76.90±27.75)HV for Fuji Ⅸ GP group and(147.67±46.42)HV for Concise group.There was a significant difference(P0.01)between the fluoride-releasing materials and the non-fluoride-releasing material,but no significant difference between ClinproTM sealant group and Fuji Ⅸ GP group(P0.05).Conclusion Both the fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant can effectively reduce the amount of enamel demineralization adjacent to the materials.Fluoride ion released from the sealants protects the adjacent enamel against in vitro demineralization to some extent.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To compare the inhibitory effect of fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant on enamel demineralization in vitro.Methods Thirty noncarious human third molars extracted were randomly divided into 3 groups with 10 in each.Cavity was placed on buccal surfaces of the molars,then filled with fluoride-releasing resin sealant(ClinproTMsealant),glass ionomer sealant(Fuji Ⅸ GP)or non-fluoride-releasing resin sealant(Concise).After thermocycling for 300 cycles,the surface microhardness of sound enamel 1 mm away from sealant-filled cavities in each group was measured.Then after the treated molars were placed in an artificial demineralizing solution for a week,their surface microhardness was detected again.Results The mean reduction of surface microhardness was(87.30±23.84)HV for ClinproTM sealant group,(76.90±27.75)HV for Fuji Ⅸ GP group and(147.67±46.42)HV for Concise group.There was a significant difference(P0.01)between the fluoride-releasing materials and the non-fluoride-releasing material,but no significant difference between ClinproTM sealant group and Fuji Ⅸ GP group(P0.05).Conclusion Both the fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant can effectively reduce the amount of enamel demineralization adjacent to the materials.Fluoride ion released from the sealants protects the adjacent enamel against in vitro demineralization to some extent.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To compare the inhibitory effect of fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant on enamel demineralization in vitro.Methods Thirty noncarious human third molars extracted were randomly divided into 3 groups with 10 in each.Cavity was placed on buccal surfaces of the molars,then filled with fluoride-releasing resin sealant(ClinproTMsealant),glass ionomer sealant(Fuji Ⅸ GP)or non-fluoride-releasing resin sealant(Concise).After thermocycling for 300 cycles,the surface microhardness of sound enamel 1 mm away from sealant-filled cavities in each group was measured.Then after the treated molars were placed in an artificial demineralizing solution for a week,their surface microhardness was detected again.Results The mean reduction of surface microhardness was(87.30±23.84)HV for ClinproTM sealant group,(76.90±27.75)HV for Fuji Ⅸ GP group and(147.67±46.42)HV for Concise group.There was a significant difference(P0.01)between the fluoride-releasing materials and the non-fluoride-releasing material,but no significant difference between ClinproTM sealant group and Fuji Ⅸ GP group(P0.05).Conclusion Both the fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant can effectively reduce the amount of enamel demineralization adjacent to the materials.Fluoride ion released from the sealants protects the adjacent enamel against in vitro demineralization to some extent.

Key concepts: Sealant, Demineralization, Fluoride, Glass ionomer cement, Enamel paint, Molar, Dentistry, Materials science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
An in vitro study on inhibition of enamel demineralization by fluoride-releasing resin sealant and glass ionomer sealant — Research Paper | ScholarLens