UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Comparison of cross-sectional hardness and transverse microradiography of artificial carious enamel lesions induced by different demineralising solutions and gels


Magalhães, A C; Moron, B M; Comar, L P; Wiegand, A; Buchalla, W; Buzalaf, M A R (2009). Comparison of cross-sectional hardness and transverse microradiography of artificial carious enamel lesions induced by different demineralising solutions and gels. Caries Research, 43(6):474-483.

Abstract

The aims of this study were: (1) to correlate surface (SH) and cross-sectional hardness (CSH) with microradiographic parameters of artificial enamel lesions; (2) to compare lesions prepared by different protocols. Fifty bovine enamel specimens were allocated by stratified randomisation according to their initial SH values to five groups and lesions produced by different methods: MC gel (methylcellulose gel/lactic acid, pH 4.6, 14 days); PA gel (polyacrylic acid/lactic acid/hydroxyapatite, pH 4.8, 16 h); MHDP (undersaturated lactate buffer/methyl diphosphonate, pH 5.0, 6 days); buffer (undersaturated acetate buffer/fluoride, pH 5.0, 16 h), and pH cycling (7 days). SH of the lesions (SH(1)) was measured. The specimens were longitudinally sectioned and transverse microradiography (TMR) and CSH measured at 10- to 220-microm depth from the surface. Overall, there was a medium correlation but non-linear and variable relationship between mineral content and radicalCSH. radicalSH(1) was weakly to moderately correlated with surface layer properties, weakly correlated with lesion depth but uncorrelated with integrated mineral loss. MHDP lesions showed the highest subsurface mineral loss, followed by pH cycling, buffer, PA gel and MC gel lesions. The conclusions were: (1) CSH, as an alternative to TMR, does not estimate mineral content very accurately, but gives information about mechanical properties of lesions; (2) SH should not be used to analyse lesions; (3) artificial caries lesions produced by the protocols differ, especially considering the method of analysis.

The aims of this study were: (1) to correlate surface (SH) and cross-sectional hardness (CSH) with microradiographic parameters of artificial enamel lesions; (2) to compare lesions prepared by different protocols. Fifty bovine enamel specimens were allocated by stratified randomisation according to their initial SH values to five groups and lesions produced by different methods: MC gel (methylcellulose gel/lactic acid, pH 4.6, 14 days); PA gel (polyacrylic acid/lactic acid/hydroxyapatite, pH 4.8, 16 h); MHDP (undersaturated lactate buffer/methyl diphosphonate, pH 5.0, 6 days); buffer (undersaturated acetate buffer/fluoride, pH 5.0, 16 h), and pH cycling (7 days). SH of the lesions (SH(1)) was measured. The specimens were longitudinally sectioned and transverse microradiography (TMR) and CSH measured at 10- to 220-microm depth from the surface. Overall, there was a medium correlation but non-linear and variable relationship between mineral content and radicalCSH. radicalSH(1) was weakly to moderately correlated with surface layer properties, weakly correlated with lesion depth but uncorrelated with integrated mineral loss. MHDP lesions showed the highest subsurface mineral loss, followed by pH cycling, buffer, PA gel and MC gel lesions. The conclusions were: (1) CSH, as an alternative to TMR, does not estimate mineral content very accurately, but gives information about mechanical properties of lesions; (2) SH should not be used to analyse lesions; (3) artificial caries lesions produced by the protocols differ, especially considering the method of analysis.

Citations

23 citations in Web of Science®
27 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 20 Jan 2010
2 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2009
Deposited On:20 Jan 2010 15:44
Last Modified:07 Aug 2016 07:10
Publisher:Karger
ISSN:0008-6568
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1159/000264685
PubMed ID:20016178
Permanent URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-27200

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher
[img]
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 274kB

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations