Influence of microhardness and fluoride content of tooth structure by fluoride-containing restorative materials

Su-Jong Lee; Young-Gon Cho; Jong-Uk Kim; Byung-Cheul Park

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.036

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(1); 2004 > Article

Original Article Influence of microhardness and fluoride content of tooth structure by fluoride-containing restorative materials: Su-Jong Lee, Young-Gon Cho, Jong-Uk Kim, Byung-Cheul Park; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2004;29(1):36-43.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.036
Published online: January 31, 2004

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, Korea.

Corresponding author: Young-Gon Cho. Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, 375 Susuk-dong, Dong-gu, Gwangju 501-759, Korea. Tel: 062)220-3840, Fax: 062)232-9064, ygcho@mail.chosun.ac.kr

14 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the microhardness and the fluoride content of enamel and dentin around fluoride- or non fluoride-containing restorations. Forty extracted human teeth were used and prepared cervical cavities on proximal surface. Experimental teeth were divided into five groups. Group 1 : Prime & Bond NT and Z100, Group 2 : Prime & Bond NT and F2000, Group 3 : Scotchbond Multi-Purpose and Z100, Group 4 : Scothcbond Multi-purpose and F2000, Group 5 : Fuji II LC. The cavities were filled with dentin adhesives and restorative materials. After each tooth was bisected, one half was tested microhardness and the other half was analyzed the fluoride at the enamel and dentin by an EPMA-WDX device. The results were as follows:

1. There was no statistical difference among the microhardness of enamel surface in all group.

2. The microhardness at dentin of 100 µm point in Group 2 and 20 µm point in Group 4 was lower than that of normal dentin (p>0.05).

3. There was no statistical difference among the fluoride content of enamel surface in all group.

4. The fluoride content at the dentin of 30 µm point in Group 2 and 5 were higher than those at 100 µm and 200 µm point in Group 2 and normal dentin (p<0.05).

5. At the dentin of 30 µm point, Group 2 showed higher fluoride content than Group 1 and 3, and Group 5 showed higher fluoride content than other groups.
Keywords: Microhardness; Fluoride content; Fluoride-containing restorative materials Cervical cavities; Dentin adhesives; EPMA-WDX

REFERENCES

1. MacInnis WA, Ismail A, Brogan H. Placement and replacement of restorations in a military population. J Can Dent Assoc. 1991;57: 227-231.PubMed
2. Corpron RE, More FG, Clark JW, Korytnicki D, Kowalski CJ. In vivo remineralization of artificial enamel lesions by a fluoride dentifrice or mouth rinse. Caries Res. 1986;20: 48-55.Article PubMed
3. Norman RD, Mehra RV, Swartz ML, Philips RW. Effects of restorative materials on plaque composition. J Dent Res. 1972;51: 1596-1601.Article PubMed PDF
4. Donly KJ, Segura A, Wefel JS, Hogan MM. Evaluating the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on adjacent interproximal caries. J Am Dent Assoc. 1999;130: 817-825.Article PubMed
5. Hicks MJ, Flaitz CM. Resin-modified glass ionomer restorations and in vitro secondary caries formation in coronal enamel. Quintessence Int. 2000;31: 570-578.PubMed
6. Retief DH, Bradley EL, Denton JC, Switzer P. Enamel and cementum fluoride uptake from a glass ionomer cement. Caries Res. 1984;18: 250-257.Article PubMed
7. Torii Y, Itota T, Okamoto M, Nakabo S, Nagaminie M, Inoue K. Inhibition of artificial secondary caries in root by fluoride-releasing restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2001;26: 36-43.PubMed
8. Diaz-Arnold AM, Holmes DC, Wistrom DW, Swift EJ Jr. Short-term fluoride release/uptake of glass ionomer restoratives. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 96-101.Article PubMed
9. Dunne SM, Goolnik JS, Millar BJ, Seddon RP. Caries inhibition by a resin-modified and a conventional glass ionomer cement in vitro. J Dent. 1996;24: 91-94.PubMed
10. Takahashi K, Emilson CG, Birkhed D. Fluoride release in vitro from various glass ionomer cements and resin composites after exposure to NaF solutions. Dent Mater. 1993;9: 350-354.Article PubMed
11. Eliades G, Kakaboura A, Palaghias G. Acid-base reaction and fluoride release profiles in visible light-cured polyacid modified composite restoratives. Dent Mater. 1998;14: 57-63.PubMed
12. Forsten L. Fluoride release and uptake by glassionomers and related materials and its clinical effect. Biomaterials. 1998;19: 503-508.Article PubMed
13. Verbeeck RM, De Maeyer AP, Marks LA, De Moor JG, De Witte AM, Trimpeneers LM. Fluoride release process of (resin-modified) glass-ionomer cements versus (polyacid-modified) composite resins. Biomaterials. 1998;19: 509-519.PubMed
14. Yap AUJ, Khor E, Foo SH. Fluoride release and antibacterial properties of new-generation tooth-colored restoratives. Oper Dent. 1999;24: 297-305.PubMed
15. Momoi Y, McCabe JF. Fluoride release from light-activated glass-ionomer restorative cements. Dent Mater. 1993;9: 151-154.Article PubMed
16. Swartz ML, Phillips RW, Clark HE. Long-term F release from glass-ionomer cements. J Dent Res. 1984;63: 158-160.Article PubMed PDF
17. Yap AUJ, Tham SY, Zhu LY, Lee HK. Short-Term Fluoride release from various aesthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 259-265.PubMed
18. Araujo FB, Godoy FG, Cury JA, Conceicao EN. Fluoride release from fluoride-containing materials. Oper Dent. 1996;21: 185-190.PubMed
19. Itota T, Okamoto M, Sato K, Nakabo S, Nagamine M, Torii Y, Inoue K. Release and recharge of fluoride by restorative materials. Dent Mater J. 1999;18: 347-353.Article PubMed
20. Preston AJ, Mair LH, Agalamanyi EA, Higham SM. Fluoride release from aesthetic dental materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1999;26: 123-129.Article PubMed
21. Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M, Karantakis P, Papadogiannis Y, Kapetanios H. Fluoride release from restorative materials and a luting cement. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86: 156-164.PubMed
22. Francci C, Deaton TG, Arnold RR, Swift EJ Jr. Fluoride release from restorative materials and its effects on dentin demineralization. J Dent Res. 1999;78: 1647-1654.Article PubMed PDF
23. Duckworth RM, Lynch RJM. Fluoride uptake to demineralised enamel: A comparison of sampling techniques. Caries Res. 1998;32: 417-421.Article PubMed PDF
24. Jones FH, Hutton BM, Hadley PC, Eccles AJ, Steele TA, Billington RW, Pearson GJ. Fluoride uptake by glass ionomer cements: a surface analysis approach. Biomaterials. 2003;24: 107-119.Article PubMed
25. Kawai K, Tantbirojin D, Kamalawat AS, Hasegawa T, Retief DH. In vitro enamel and cementum fluoride uptake from three fluoride-containing composites. Caries Res. 1998;32: 463-469.PubMed
26. Raven SJ, Schafer F, Duckworth RM, Gilbert RJ, Parr TA. Comparison between evaluation methods for the anti-caries efficacy of monofluorophosphate-containing dentifrices. Caries Res. 1991;25: 130-137.Article PubMed
27. Papagiannoulis L, Kakaboura A, Eliades G. In vivo vs in vitro anticariogenic behavior of glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater. 2002;18: 561-569.Article PubMed
28. Pereira PNR, Inokoshi S, Tagami J. In vitro secondary caries inhibition around fluoride releasing materials. J Dent. 1998;26: 505-510.Article PubMed
29. Yamamoto H, Iwami Y, Unezaki T, Tomii Y, Ebisu S. Fluoride uptake in human teeth from fluoride-releasing restorative material in vivo and in vitro: Two-dimensional mapping by EPMA-WDX. Caries Res. 2001;35: 111-115.PubMed
30. Hotta M, Li Y, Sekine I. Mineralization in bovine dentin adjacent to glass-ionomer restorations. J Dent. 2001;29: 211-215.Article PubMed
31. Reintsema H, Arends J. An in vivo study of microhardness and fluoride uptake in partially demineralized human enamel covered by plaque. J Dent Res. 1988;67: 471-473.Article PubMed PDF
32. Samuel SM, Rubinstein C. Microhardness of enamel restored with fluoride and non-fluoride releasing dental materials. Braz Dent J. 2001;12: 35-38.PubMed
33. Nakabayashi N, Nakamura M, Yasuda N. Hybrid layer as a dentin bonding mechanism. J Esthet Dent. 1991;3: 133-138.PubMed
34. Benelli EM, Serra MC, Rodrigues AL Jr, Cury JA. In situ anticariogenic potential of glass ionomer cement. Caries Res. 1993;27: 280-284.Article PubMed
35. Dijkman GE, de Vries J, Arends J. Secondary caries in dentine around composites: a wavelength-independent microradiographical study. Caries Res. 1994;28: 87-93.Article PubMed
36. Dionysopoulos P, Kotsanos N, Pagadogiannis Y, Konstantinidis A. Artificial secondary caries around two new F-containing restoratives. Oper Dent. 1998;23: 81-86.PubMed
37. Guha-Chowdhury N, Clark AG, Sissons CH. Inhibition of purified enolases from oral bacteria by fluoride. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1997;12: 91-97.PubMed
38. Marquis RE. Antimicrobial actions of fluoride for oral bacteria. Can J Microbiol. 1995;41: 955-964.Article PubMed
39. Dijkman GE, Arends J. Secondary caries in situ around fluoride-releasing light-curing composites: A quantitative model investigation on four materials with a fluoride content between 0 and 26 vol%. Caries Res. 1992;26: 351-357.Article PubMed
40. Corpron RE, More FG, Mount G. Comparison of fluoride profiles by SIMS with mineral density of subsurface enamel lesions treated intra-orally with a fluoride-releasing device. J Dent Res. 1992;71: 828-831.Article PubMed PDF
41. Kotsanos N. An intraoral study of caries induced on enamel in contact with fluoride-releasing restorative materials. Caries Res. 2001;35: 200-204.PubMed
42. Han L, Abu-Bakr N, Okamoto A, Iwaku M. Study of the fluoridated adhesive resin cement--fluoride release, fluoride uptake and acid resistance of tooth structures. Dent Mater J. 2001;20: 114-122.Article PubMed
43. Boyde A, et al. Application of the scanning electron probe X-ray microanalyzer to dental tissues. J Ultrastruct Res. 1961;5: 201-207.PubMed
44. Feilzer AJ, De Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Relaxation of polymerization contraction shear stress by hygroscopic expansion. J Dent Res. 1990;69: 36-39.Article PubMed PDF
45. Mazzaoui SA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Fluoride release from glass ionomer cements and resin composites coated with a dentin adhesive. Dent Mater. 2000;16: 166-171.PubMed

Fig. 1

Diagram of proximal cavity preparation

Fig. 2

Diagram of indentation point for microhardness and EPMA test (F: Filling materials)

Table 1

Classification of group and materials used

Table 2

Microhardness values on enamel surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

NE : Normal Enamel, RE : Enamel after Restoration

Table 3

Microhardness values on dentin surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

ND : Normal Dentin, RD : Dentin after Restoration

^*: Significant differences between ND and RD in same depth (p<0.05)

Table 4

Atomic % of fluoride on enamel surface (EPMA/WDX)

Table 5

Atomic % of fluoride on dentin surface (EPMA/WDX)

Superscripts of the same letter indicate values of statistically no significant difference (p<0.05)

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Influence of microhardness and fluoride content of tooth structure by fluoride-containing restorative materials

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(1):36-43. Published online January 31, 2004

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.1.036

XML Download

Figure

Influence of microhardness and fluoride content of tooth structure by fluoride-containing restorative materials

Fig. 1 Diagram of proximal cavity preparation

Fig. 2 Diagram of indentation point for microhardness and EPMA test (F: Filling materials)

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Influence of microhardness and fluoride content of tooth structure by fluoride-containing restorative materials

Table 1

Classification of group and materials used

Table 2

Microhardness values on enamel surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

NE : Normal Enamel, RE : Enamel after Restoration

Table 3

Microhardness values on dentin surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

ND : Normal Dentin, RD : Dentin after Restoration

^*: Significant differences between ND and RD in same depth (p<0.05)

Table 4

Atomic % of fluoride on enamel surface (EPMA/WDX)

Table 5

Atomic % of fluoride on dentin surface (EPMA/WDX)

Superscripts of the same letter indicate values of statistically no significant difference (p<0.05)

Table 1 Classification of group and materials used

Table 2 Microhardness values on enamel surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

NE : Normal Enamel, RE : Enamel after Restoration

Table 3 Microhardness values on dentin surface [Mean±S.D.](Knoop Hardness)

ND : Normal Dentin, RD : Dentin after Restoration

^*: Significant differences between ND and RD in same depth (p<0.05)

Table 4 Atomic % of fluoride on enamel surface (EPMA/WDX)

Table 5 Atomic % of fluoride on dentin surface (EPMA/WDX)

Superscripts of the same letter indicate values of statistically no significant difference (p<0.05)