Preston Antony J, Agalamanyi Emmanuel A, Higham Susan M, Mair Lawrence H
Division of Restorative Dentistry, Leeds Dental Institute, Clarendon Way, LS2 9LU, Leeds, UK.
Dent Mater. 2003 Jan;19(1):32-7. doi: 10.1016/s0109-5641(02)00011-8.
A range of esthetic restorative dental materials are now available to dental clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relative fluoride recharge potential of a number of these materials in vitro over two years.
Disc samples (12 mm x 2 mm) of each of the materials were placed into artificial saliva at neutral pH. The materials tested were: two glass ionomers (Chemfil; Ketac-Fil), two resin-modified glass ionomers (Photac-Fil Aplicap; Vitremer), two compomers (Dyract; Compoglass) and two composites (Heliomolar; Concise). At 13 intervals over a two years period the discs were subjected to a 2 min fluoride recharge by exposure to sodium fluoride (500 ppm F). The pre- and post-recharge fluoride release values were determined using an ion sensitive electrode.
At all time intervals the post-recharge fluoride release of the materials was significantly different (MANOVA p<0.0001). The mean values for post-recharge fluoride release after two years were: Chemfil 10.3, Ketac 3.0, Vitremer 9.0, Photac-Fil Aplicap 12.1, Compoglass 5.0, Dyract 3.6, Concise 0.3, Heliomolar 0.2 (units = microgF/cm(2)/h).
Esthetic fillings vary significantly in their capacity to absorb and re-release fluoride. The glass ionomer-based materials displayed a far greater potential for fluoride recharge than the composites, in which the recharge was virtually negligible. Whilst it cannot be assumed that fluoride release is directly proportional to cariostatic potential, these results suggest that, where possible, glass ionomer-based materials should be used in patients who have a high caries rate.
目前牙科临床医生可使用一系列美观的牙齿修复材料。本研究的目的是在体外评估这些材料中多种材料在两年内的相对氟再充注潜力。
将每种材料的圆盘样本(12毫米×2毫米)置于中性pH值的人工唾液中。测试的材料有:两种玻璃离子水门汀(化学充填剂;凯塔充填剂)、两种树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(光固化玻璃离子水门汀;维他玻璃离子水门汀)、两种复合体(Dyract;Compoglass)和两种复合树脂(贺利氏磨牙树脂;Concise)。在两年期间的13个时间间隔,将圆盘暴露于氟化钠(500 ppm F)中2分钟进行氟再充注。使用离子敏感电极测定再充注前后的氟释放值。
在所有时间间隔,材料再充注后的氟释放量均有显著差异(多变量方差分析p<0.0001)。两年后再充注氟释放的平均值为:化学充填剂10.3、凯塔充填剂3.0、维他玻璃离子水门汀9.0、光固化玻璃离子水门汀12.1、Compoglass 5.0、Dyract 3.6、Concise 0.3、贺利氏磨牙树脂0.2(单位=μgF/cm²/h)。
美观充填材料在吸收和再释放氟的能力方面差异显著。基于玻璃离子水门汀的材料显示出比复合树脂大得多的氟再充注潜力,复合树脂中的再充注几乎可以忽略不计。虽然不能假定氟释放与防龋潜力直接成正比,但这些结果表明,在可能的情况下,基于玻璃离子水门汀的材料应用于龋齿发生率高的患者。