IADR Abstract Archives
Effect of Two Treatments on Human Tooth Enamel Demineralization and Remineralization
Objectives: Oral pH fluctuates widely, ranging from acidic to basic many times a day. So, teeth are constantly balanced between being demineralized and re-mineralized throughout the day. Products are now being marketed that report to push the balance to re-mineralization and/or prevent demineralization of the tooth. This project evaluated the ability of a commercially available product and a novel material at providing such prevention of demineralization and promotion of re-mineralization.
Methods: Twenty human molars were collected and covered with acid-resistant varnish, leaving two 2x6 mm uncovered test areas, one on each of the lingual and buccal surfaces. Teeth were randomly assigned to either the re-mineralization or demineralization group (N=10 each). The re-mineralization group was subjected to pH-cycling for ten days, forming an initial white spot lesion in both uncovered regions. One of the test regions was covered with wax at day 10. Both groups underwent pH-cycling for an additional 10 days with treatment performed daily.
Treatments consisted of gently massaging either MI Paste+ (GC America, Chicago, IL) or calcium bentonite clay (Painted Deserts Bentonite LLC, Scottsdale, AZ) into one test region per tooth for two minutes. Teeth were embedded in epoxy, sectioned and polished. Micro-hardness was measured along a line perpendicular to the tooth surface in the test regions as well as under an area protected by the varnish. Percentage change in hardness values were compared using ANOVA to assess for significant differences with α=0.05.
Results: MI Paste+ appeared to provide a slight (but not significant) advantage over calcium bentonite clay at regions within 150 um of the surface. However all regions were not significantly different once we went deeper into the sample, for both prevention of demineralization and promotion of re-mineralization.
Conclusions: Both of the treatment tested in this study failed to prevent demineralization or provide remineralization using the aggressive pH cycling protocol.
Methods: Twenty human molars were collected and covered with acid-resistant varnish, leaving two 2x6 mm uncovered test areas, one on each of the lingual and buccal surfaces. Teeth were randomly assigned to either the re-mineralization or demineralization group (N=10 each). The re-mineralization group was subjected to pH-cycling for ten days, forming an initial white spot lesion in both uncovered regions. One of the test regions was covered with wax at day 10. Both groups underwent pH-cycling for an additional 10 days with treatment performed daily.
Treatments consisted of gently massaging either MI Paste+ (GC America, Chicago, IL) or calcium bentonite clay (Painted Deserts Bentonite LLC, Scottsdale, AZ) into one test region per tooth for two minutes. Teeth were embedded in epoxy, sectioned and polished. Micro-hardness was measured along a line perpendicular to the tooth surface in the test regions as well as under an area protected by the varnish. Percentage change in hardness values were compared using ANOVA to assess for significant differences with α=0.05.
Results: MI Paste+ appeared to provide a slight (but not significant) advantage over calcium bentonite clay at regions within 150 um of the surface. However all regions were not significantly different once we went deeper into the sample, for both prevention of demineralization and promotion of re-mineralization.
Conclusions: Both of the treatment tested in this study failed to prevent demineralization or provide remineralization using the aggressive pH cycling protocol.