氟化物“涂药”与托盘应用技术在牙釉质再矿化中的比较。

A Comparison of the Fluoride 'Paint- On' vs Tray Application Techniques for Enamel Remineralisation.

机构信息

Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry Residency Program, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

Int Dent J. 2024 Oct;74(5):1006-1015. doi: 10.1016/j.identj.2024.03.003. Epub 2024 Apr 12.

DOI:10.1016/j.identj.2024.03.003

PMID:38614880

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11561508/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Fluoride gel treatment is not recommended for children < 6 years old due to its potential toxicity. Hence the aim of this study was to compare the effect of 1.23% acidulated-phosphate fluoride (APF) gel paint-on and the conventional tray application techniques on artificial, deciduous enamel carious lesions embedded on wearable appliances.

METHODS

In a randomised crossover study, the volunteer children (n = 29) wore mandibular removable appliances containing embedded tooth specimens with artificial carious lesions. The volunteers had 3 different treatment protocols: (I) 0.4 mL non-fluoride (control) gel, (II) 0.4 mL paint-on 1.23% APF gel or (III) 5 mL 1.23% APF gel, 4 minutes tray application. After 1 hour, the appliances were removed and the specimens underwent an in vitro, 14 days of pH-cycling. The mean percentage reduction in fluorescence (ΔF, %) at baseline (ΔF) and after the pH-cycling (ΔF) were determined using quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital analysis. The mean ΔΔF (ΔF-ΔF) was calculated to compare the differences between groups.

RESULTS

The mean ΔΔF of groups I to III were -1.42 ± 1.49, 1.06 ± 2.11, and 1.12 ± 3.57 and -1.25 ± 1.44, 1.13 ± 1.84 and 1.44 ± 3.62 for the smooth surface and proximal surface lesions, respectively. The mean ΔΔF in the 2 treatment groups were significantly greater compared with the control group (P < .001). There was no significant difference in ΔΔF between the APF gel tray and paint-on groups either in the smooth surfaces, or the proximal surfaces (P = .629 and P = .613, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study, for the first time, indicates that the paint-on application of APF gel or the tray application of APF had a similar enamel remineralisation effect. Clinically, this implies that, particularly in younger children, the paint-on application of fluoride is less cumbersome, and possibly more tolerable with a lesser likelihood of fluoride ingestion than the tray application technique.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Thai Clinical Trial Registry (https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20190724001).

摘要

背景

由于氟化物的潜在毒性，不建议 6 岁以下儿童使用氟凝胶治疗。因此，本研究旨在比较 1.23%酸性磷酸氟化物（APF）凝胶涂漆和传统托盘应用技术对可佩戴器具上嵌入的人工乳牙釉质龋损的影响。

方法

在一项随机交叉研究中，志愿者儿童（n=29）佩戴下颌可摘式义齿，义齿中含有嵌入的牙齿标本和人工龋损。志愿者接受了 3 种不同的治疗方案：（I）0.4mL 无氟（对照）凝胶，（II）0.4mL 涂敷 1.23%APF 凝胶，或（III）4 分钟托盘应用 5mL 1.23%APF 凝胶。1 小时后，取出义齿，标本进行体外 14 天 pH 循环。使用定量光致荧光数字分析确定基线（ΔF）和 pH 循环后（ΔF）荧光平均减少百分比（ΔF，%）。计算平均ΔΔF（ΔF-ΔF）以比较组间差异。

结果

组 I 至组 III 的平均ΔΔF 分别为-1.42±1.49、1.06±2.11 和 1.12±3.57，以及-1.25±1.44、1.13±1.84 和 1.44±3.62，用于光滑表面和近表面病变。与对照组相比，2 个治疗组的平均ΔΔF 显著更高（P<.001）。APF 凝胶托盘和涂敷组在光滑表面或近表面的ΔΔF 之间无显著差异（P=.629 和 P=.613）。