Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jul;20(6):1355-66.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1624-z. Epub 2015 Oct 7.

Efficacy of four preventive measures against enamel demineralization at the bracket periphery-comparison of microhardness and confocal laser microscopy analysis

Ekaterini Paschos  1 , Franz-Josef Geiger  2 , Yuriy Malyk  3 , Ingrid Rudzki  2 , Andrea Wichelhaus  4 , Nicoleta Ilie  3
Affiliations

Efficacy of four preventive measures against enamel demineralization at the bracket periphery-comparison of microhardness and confocal laser microscopy analysis

Ekaterini Paschos et al. Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this in-vitro study was to investigate the efficacy of four preventive measures against enamel demineralization and to compare the suitability of microhardness (MH) measurements and confocal laser microscopy (CLSM).

Materials and methods: A total of 80 teeth were randomly allocated into four groups. The effect against demineralization of two coating materials (group 1: resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) cement varnish (ClinproXT); group 2: composite sealant (ProSeal)) and that of two types of bracket-bonding material (group 3: amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP) composite (AegisOrtho); group 4: RMGI (FujiOrthoLC)) was compared after pH-cycling by MH and CLSM. Measurements were made at the edge of the coating/bracket as well as at 50, 100, 200, and 400 μm distance. The data were converted into values of mineralization (Vol%) and analyzed by parametric (ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc) or non-parametric (Kruskal-Wallis and Games-Howell post hoc) tests.

Results: ClinproXT and ProSeal were proved to protect the bracket periphery. However, the area next to them showed demineralizations. The mean area of lesion (CLSM-data) was significantly different between the groups (p < 0.0001). The smallest lesions were revealed for the RMGI-based materials. MH identified only for group 4 a significant difference between the area next to the bracket base and that at 200 and 400 µm distance.

Conclusion: There was nearly no lesion under both coatings. A stagnation of demineralization was identified particularly for the RMGI. ProSeal showed an inferior protection of the untreated enamel. MH and CLSM analysis were suitable to detect subsurface lesions.

Clinical relevance: A diverse efficacy of materials against enamel demineralization at bracket periphery has to be noticed.

Keywords: ACP; CLSM; Demineralization; Microhardness; Sealant; White-spots.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Apr;133(4 Suppl):S88-94 - PubMed
    1. Dent Mater. 1993 Nov;9(6):350-4 - PubMed
    1. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Nov;128(5):592-600; quiz 670 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Dent. 2009 Apr;3(2):127-34 - PubMed
    1. Caries Res. 1996;30(5):317-25 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources