Department of Biological Sciences-Bauru School of Dentistry/University of São Paulo (USP), Bauru-SP, Brazil; Master's Program in Dentistry-University City of São Paulo (UNICID), São Paulo-SP, Brazil.
Department of Biological Sciences-Bauru School of Dentistry/University of São Paulo (USP), Bauru-SP, Brazil.
J Dent. 2017 Aug;63:81-84. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.023. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
To compare the effect of TiF and NaF varnishes on demineralized bovine enamel under different cariogenic activities in situ.
Twenty subjects participated of this in situ study with 3 crossover phases (14days each), in which they wore palatal appliances containing demineralized bovine enamel samples (8 samples/appliance for phase) treated with TiF, NaF (all with 2.45% F) or placebo varnish. The samples were subjected to different cariogenic conditions (1. absence of biofilm accumulation and sucrose exposure; 2. presence of biofilm and absence of sucrose exposure; 3. presence of biofilm and 20% sucrose exposure 4×/day; 4. presence of biofilm and 20% sucrose exposure 8×/day). All were exposed to fluoride dentifrice (2×/day). The mineral content and lesion depth were evaluated using transverse microradiography (TMR) and the data were subjected to RM two-way ANOVA/Bonferroni tests (p<0.05).
TiF varnish significantly increased the remineralization of artificial carious lesions compared to placebo, regardless of the cariogenic activity. On the other hand, the remineralizing effect of NaF varnish was dependent on the cariogenic activity. For NaF, remineralization happened only in conditions 1 and 3 compared to placebo varnish (p<0.0001). NaF was unable to prevent further demineralization under biofilm accumulation and sucrose exposure 8×/day (condition 4). In the absence of fluoride treatment, demineralization happened in all conditions, except in the condition 1.
Therefore, 4% TiF varnish was the only treatment able to improve enamel remineralization regardless of the cariogenic activity, while NaF varnish failed in preventing further demineralization under high cariogenic activity in situ.
4% TiF varnish showed better remineralizing effect compared to NaF varnish, which was seen regardless of the cariogenic activity. This is a promising finding to support the indication of TiF in the clinic.
比较 TiF 和 NaF 两种氟化物涂料在不同致龋活性下对脱矿牛牙釉质的影响。
20 名受试者参与了这项现场研究，分为 3 个交叉阶段（每个阶段 14 天），每个阶段他们都佩戴含有脱矿牛牙釉质样本的腭部器械（每个器械 8 个样本），这些样本用 TiF、NaF（均含 2.45% F）或安慰剂涂料处理。样本受到不同致龋条件的影响（1. 无生物膜积累和蔗糖暴露；2. 有生物膜但无蔗糖暴露；3. 有生物膜和 20%蔗糖暴露 4 次/天；4. 有生物膜和 20%蔗糖暴露 8 次/天）。所有样本均使用含氟牙膏（每天 2 次）处理。使用横向显微放射摄影术（TMR）评估矿物质含量和病变深度，数据采用 RM 双向方差分析/邦弗伦尼检验（p<0.05）。
与安慰剂相比，TiF 涂料显著增加了人工龋损的再矿化，无论致龋活性如何。另一方面，NaF 涂料的再矿化效果取决于致龋活性。与安慰剂相比，NaF 仅在条件 1 和 3 中发生再矿化（p<0.0001）。在生物膜积累和蔗糖暴露 8 次/天的情况下（条件 4），NaF 无法阻止进一步脱矿。在没有氟化物处理的情况下，除条件 1 外，所有条件下都发生了脱矿。
因此，4% TiF 涂料是唯一能够改善釉质再矿化的治疗方法，无论致龋活性如何，而 NaF 涂料在现场高致龋活性下无法阻止进一步脱矿。
4% TiF 涂料的再矿化效果优于 NaF 涂料，无论致龋活性如何，这一发现支持了 TiF 在临床中的应用。
