Marinelli C B, Donly K J, Wefel J S, Jakobsen J R, Denehy G E
Dows Institute for Dental Research, College of Dentistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City 52242, USA.
Caries Res. 1997;31(6):418-22. doi: 10.1159/000262432.
The purpose of this study was to compare the enamel remineralization effectiveness of a fluoride rinse, fluoridated dentifrice, and fluoride-releasing restorative material. Forty extracted molars had 1 x 5 mm artificial carious lesions formed at the interproximal contact point. One-hundred-micrometer sections were obtained at the caries sites, and polarized light photomicrographs were obtained. The sections had varnish placed, leaving only the external section site exposed, and were situated back into the original tooth. Forty other molars were obtained; 10 had Class-II glass ionomer cement restorations placed. These 40 teeth were mounted to have interproximal contact with the adjacent teeth containing artificial carious lesions. Specimens were placed in closed environments of artificial saliva for 1 month, with saliva being changed every 48 h. Ten specimen pairs were brushed with a fluoridated dentifrice for 2 min, twice per day, 10 specimen pairs were rinsed with a 0.05% sodium fluoride rinse for 1 min twice per day, 10 specimen pairs had Class-II glass ionomer cement restorations positioned adjacent to 10 teeth with artificial carious lesions, and 10 specimen pairs acted as controls. After 30 days, the same sections were photographed again under polarized light, and areas of the lesions were digitized quantitatively. Results demonstrated the mean (+/- SD) remineralization (mu m2) in Thoulet's 1.41 imbibition media to be: lesions adjacent to glass ionomer cement restorations, 2.45 +/- 170; lesions exposed to a fluoridated dentifrice, 223 +/- 102; lesions exposed to 0.05% sodium fluoride rinse, 374 +/- 120, and control lesions only exposed to artificial saliva, 101 +/- 69. Duncan's analysis indicated the fluoridated rinse to have significantly greater remineralization effects on adjacent caries than the other groups (p < or = 0.05). The glass ionomer restorative material and fluoridated dentifrice also had significantly greater remineralization effects on adjacent caries than the control, yet significantly less than the fluoridated rinse (p < or = 0.05).
本研究的目的是比较含氟漱口水、含氟牙膏和释氟修复材料对牙釉质再矿化的效果。40颗拔除的磨牙在邻面接触点形成1×5毫米的人工龋损。在龋损部位获取100微米厚的切片，并拍摄偏光显微照片。在切片上涂覆清漆，仅暴露外部切片部位，然后将其放回原牙中。另外获取40颗磨牙；其中10颗进行了Ⅱ类玻璃离子水门汀修复。将这40颗牙齿安装成使其邻面与含有人工龋损的相邻牙齿接触。将标本置于人工唾液的封闭环境中1个月，每48小时更换一次唾液。10对标本每天用含氟牙膏刷牙2分钟，刷两次；10对标本每天用0.05%的氟化钠漱口水漱口1分钟，漱两次；10对标本在10颗有人工龋损的牙齿旁放置Ⅱ类玻璃离子水门汀修复体；10对标本作为对照。30天后，在偏光下再次拍摄相同的切片，并对病损区域进行定量数字化处理。结果表明，在Thoulet的1.41吸收介质中，平均（±标准差）再矿化（μm²）情况如下：与玻璃离子水门汀修复体相邻的病损为2.45±170；暴露于含氟牙膏的病损为223±102；暴露于0.05%氟化钠漱口水的病损为374±120，仅暴露于人工唾液的对照病损为101±69。Duncan分析表明，氟化漱口水对相邻龋损的再矿化效果显著优于其他组（p≤0.05）。玻璃离子修复材料和含氟牙膏对相邻龋损的再矿化效果也显著优于对照组，但显著低于氟化漱口水（p≤0.05）。
