Effect of fluoride varnish on enamel demineralization around brackets: An in-vivo study

2008 ◽  
Vol 133 (4) ◽  
pp. S95-S98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasrin Farhadian ◽  
Amirfarhang Miresmaeili ◽  
Behnam Eslami ◽  
Sara Mehrabi
Keyword(s):  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Fluoride Varnish ◽  
Enamel Demineralization

Effect of light-curable fluoride varnish on enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets: An in-vivo study

2015 ◽  
Vol 148 (5) ◽  
pp. 814-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anurag Mehta ◽  
Ganesh Paramshivam ◽  
Vinay Kumar Chugh ◽  
Surjit Singh ◽  
Sudha Halkai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Brackets ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Fluoride Varnish ◽  
Enamel Demineralization ◽  
Effect Of Light

scholarly journals Efficacy of Light-Activated Sealant on Enamel Demineralization in Orthodontic Patients: An Atomic Force Microscope Evaluation

2011 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzi F Shinaishin ◽  
Safaa A Ghobashy ◽  
Tarek H EL-Bialy
Keyword(s):  
Surface Area ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Total Surface Area ◽  
Roughness Height ◽  
Fluoride Varnish ◽  
Enamel Demineralization ◽  
Atomic Force ◽  
Orthodontic Patients ◽  
Level Of Significance

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of (Pro Seal) sealant in preventing enamel decalcification in-vivo and compare its effect with fluoride varnish and unfilled sealant using atomic force microscopy. Materials and Methods: Eight orthodontic patients who were candidates for extraction of all first premolars for orthodontic treatment were recruited to this study. Thirty two premolars (upper and lower) were randomly divided into four groups (n=8) for each group, 4 maxillary and 4 mandibular); Control (no -treatment); Fluoride varnish, Unfilled sealant (Light Bond) and filled sealant (Pro-Seal). After two months the brackets were debonded and the teeth were extracted and prepared for Atomic force microscopic scanning. Each sample was scanned twice at two different scan areas 50 and 10µm at the buccal cervical third of the crown. Images were recorded with slow scan rate and resolution and the mean roughness height and total surface area were calculated for each scan area. Comparison between groups was performed using one way analysis of variance test with level of significance was set to be 0.05. Results: Pro Seal treated samples show the lowest roughness height and total surface area. Conclusion: Pro Seal was the most effective prophylaxis technique in preventing enamel demineralization during orthodontic treatment.

scholarly journals In vivo effect of antibacterial and fluoride-releasing adhesives on enamel demineralization around brackets: A micro-CT study

2017 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 841-846 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aslihan Zeynep Oz ◽  
Abdullah Alper Oz ◽  
Sabahat Yazıcıoglu
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
White Spot Lesion ◽  
Micro Ct ◽  
Preventive Effect ◽  
Orthodontic Bracket ◽  
Enamel Demineralization ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Preventive Effects

ABSTRACT Objectives: The aim of this in vivo study was to investigate the preventive effect of two different adhesives on enamel demineralization and compare these adhesives with a conventional one. Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients requiring the extraction of their first four premolars for orthodontic treatment were included in the study. One premolar was randomly selected, and an antibacterial monomer-containing and fluoride-releasing adhesive (Clearfil Protect Bond, Kuraray Medical, Okayama, Japan) was used for orthodontic bracket bonding. Another premolar was randomly selected, and a fluoride-releasing and recharging orthodontic adhesive (Opal Seal, Ultradent Products, South Jordan, Utah) was used. One premolar was assigned as a control, and a conventional adhesive (Transbond XT, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) was used. The teeth were extracted after 8 weeks, and the demineralization areas of the 45 extracted teeth were analyzed using microcomputed tomography with software. Results: There was no significant difference between the white spot lesion (WSL) rates of the adhesives (P > .05). The volumes of the WSLs varied from 0 to 0.019349 mm3. Although Opal Seal showed the smallest lesion volumes, there was no significant difference in volumetric measurements of the lesions among the groups (P > .05). Conclusions: The findings indicated no significant differences between the preventive effects of the adhesives used in this in vivo study over 8 weeks.

scholarly journals Enamel demineralization around two different orthodontic bracket adhesive systems: An in vivo study

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naif A. Almosa ◽  
Abdulmohsen M. Alqasir ◽  
Mohammad A. Aldekhayyil ◽  
Abdullah Aljelayel ◽  
Mohammed A. Aldosari
Keyword(s):  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Orthodontic Bracket ◽  
Enamel Demineralization
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document