Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Effect of sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at the same concentration and different pH on in vitro erosion


Wiegand, A; Bichsel, D; Magalhães, A C; Becker, K; Attin, T (2009). Effect of sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at the same concentration and different pH on in vitro erosion. Journal of Dentistry, 37(8):591-595.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effects 0.5% and 1% sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at different pH on enamel erosion in vitro. METHODS: Bovine enamel samples were submitted to a cyclic de- and remineralisation for 3 days. Each day, the samples were exposed for 120 min to pooled human saliva and subsequently treated with one of the fluoride solutions for 3 min: amine fluoride (AmF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), sodium fluoride (NaF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), each at pH 3.9 and 7.0, and stannous fluoride (SnF(2), 0.5% and 1% F(-)), at pH: 3.9. Additionally, two groups were treated with fluoride-free placebo solutions (pH: 3.9 and 7.0) and one group served as control (no fluoridation). Ten specimens each group were inserted in a so-called artificial mouth and eroded six times daily with hydrochloric acid (pH 2.6) for 90 s each intermitted by exposure to artificial saliva (1h). After 3 days, enamel loss was analyzed profilometrically and evaluated statistically by ANOVA. RESULTS: Only the acidic 0.5% and 1% SnF(2) and 1% AmF solutions were able to reduce erosive enamel loss significantly, while all other solutions and placebos did not differ significantly from the control. Between the acidic SnF(2) and the 1% AmF solutions no significant differences could be detected. CONCLUSION: At the same concentrations, acidic SnF(2) and AmF may be more effective than NaF to protect enamel against erosion.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effects 0.5% and 1% sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at different pH on enamel erosion in vitro. METHODS: Bovine enamel samples were submitted to a cyclic de- and remineralisation for 3 days. Each day, the samples were exposed for 120 min to pooled human saliva and subsequently treated with one of the fluoride solutions for 3 min: amine fluoride (AmF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), sodium fluoride (NaF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), each at pH 3.9 and 7.0, and stannous fluoride (SnF(2), 0.5% and 1% F(-)), at pH: 3.9. Additionally, two groups were treated with fluoride-free placebo solutions (pH: 3.9 and 7.0) and one group served as control (no fluoridation). Ten specimens each group were inserted in a so-called artificial mouth and eroded six times daily with hydrochloric acid (pH 2.6) for 90 s each intermitted by exposure to artificial saliva (1h). After 3 days, enamel loss was analyzed profilometrically and evaluated statistically by ANOVA. RESULTS: Only the acidic 0.5% and 1% SnF(2) and 1% AmF solutions were able to reduce erosive enamel loss significantly, while all other solutions and placebos did not differ significantly from the control. Between the acidic SnF(2) and the 1% AmF solutions no significant differences could be detected. CONCLUSION: At the same concentrations, acidic SnF(2) and AmF may be more effective than NaF to protect enamel against erosion.

Statistics

Citations

41 citations in Web of Science®
42 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

94 downloads since deposited on 05 Aug 2009
16 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:August 2009
Deposited On:05 Aug 2009 08:55
Last Modified:06 Dec 2017 20:17
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0300-5712
Additional Information:Elsevier full text article
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.03.020
Related URLs:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03005712 (Publisher)
PubMed ID:19403228

Download

Download PDF  'Effect of sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at the same concentration and different pH on in vitro erosion'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher