Efficacy of different strategies in protecting enamel against demineralization during fixed orthodontic treatment

Original article

Abstract

Background and objective

Sealant application is a common strategy for preventing enamel demineralization during multibracket treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy in enamel demineralization prevention of two fluoride-containing enamel varnishes compared to a non-fluoride varnish, weekly fluoride gel application, and a non-treated control group.

Materials and methods

Enamel specimens obtained from 75 human upper permanent incisors were randomly allocated to five trial groups (each n = 15): A), ProSeal (Reliance), B), Maximum Cure® (Reliance), C), CervitecPlus (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), D) elmex® gelée (GABA, Lörrach, Germany), and E), a non-treated control group. Groups A–C received a baseline varnish application, whereas group D specimens received a once weekly gel application for 2 min. Six demineralization cycles per day were carried out for 5 min each using 0.05 M citric acid, with the specimens stored in remineralization solution between cycles. Lesion depth expressed in percentage fluorescence loss (Δ-F in %) compared to baseline (T0) was assessed quantitatively with light-induced fluorescence (QLF) after 3 (T1), 7 (T2), 14 (T3), and 30 (T4) days globally and for each time point, and analyzed for compounds using the Kruskal–Wallis test (α = 5%), and additional one-sample Wilcoxon tests for each time/compound combination (Bonferroni-corrected α-levels α* = 0.05/4 = 0.0125).

Results

Significant fluorescence loss revealing greater lesion depth was detected in the untreated controls (E) at T3, and in groups A (ProSeal) and C (CervitecPlus) at T4. No significant Δ-F changes were seen in the specimens from groups B (Maximum Cure®) and D (elmex® gelée).

Conclusion

Maximum Cure® sealant seems to offer efficient protection against demineralization during fixed orthodontic treatment, as does weekly application of elmex® fluoride gel.

Keywords

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) Demineralization protection Fluoride sealants 

Effizienz verschiedener Strategien zum Demineralisationsschutz während der Multibracket-Behandlung

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund und Zielsetzung

Zur Prävention von Schmelzdemineralisationen während der Multibracket-Behandlung ist das Aufbringen von Versieglern üblich. Studienziel ist die Bestimmung der demineralisationsprotektiven Effizienz zweier fluoridhaltiger Versiegelungslacke im Vergleich zu einem nichtfluoridhaltigen Lack, einer wöchentlichen Fluoridgelapplikation und einer unbehandelten Kontrollgruppe.

Material und Methodik

Schmelzproben von 75 humanen, permanenten oberen Inzisivi wurden randomisiert 5 Studiengruppen zugeordnet (jeweils n = 15): A), ProSeal, B), Maximum Cure® (beide: Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, IL, USA), C), CervitecPlus (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), D), elmex® gelée (GABA, Lörrach, Deutschland), und E), einer unbehandelten Kontrollgruppe. Gemäß Herstellerangaben erhielten die Gruppen A bis C jeweils eine Baseline-Applikation, Gruppe D dagegen eine wöchentliche Gelapplikation für 2 Minuten. Sechs Demineralisationszyklen/Tag wurden für jeweils 5 Minuten mit 0,05 M Zitronensäure durchgeführt, bei zwischenzeitlicher Lagerung in einer Remineralisationslösung. Läsionstiefen wurden mittels lichtinduzierter Fluoreszenz (QLF) nach 3 (T1), 7 (T2), 14 (T3), und 30 (T4) Tagen als prozentualer Fluoreszenzabfall (Δ-F in %) mit den Baselinewerten (T0) quantitativ abgeglichen. Statistische Analysen erfolgten sowohl global als auch separat für jeden Zeitpunkt mit dem Kruskal-Wallis-Test (α = 5%) und zusätzlichen Wilcoxon-Tests für jede Zeitpunkt/Behandlungs-Kombination (Bonferroni-korrigiert α-Level α* = 0,05/4 = 0,0125).

Ergebnisse

Signifikante Fluoreszenzverluste (als Zeichen sich vertiefender Läsionen) wurden in der unbehandelten Kontrollgruppe (E) ab T3 und für die Gruppen A (ProSeal) und C (CervitecPlus) ab T4 verzeichnet. Keine signifikanten Δ-F-Veränderungen wurden in den Gruppen B (Maximum Cure®) und D (elmex® Gelèe) festgestellt.

Schlussfolgerung

Die Versiegelung mit Maximum Cure® scheint ebenso wie die wöchentliche Applikation des Fluoridgels elmex® einen effizienten Schutz gegen Demineralisation während der festsitzenden Behandlung zu bieten.

Schlüsselwörter

Quantitative lichtinduzierte Fluoreszenz (QLF) Demineralisationsschutz Fluoridhaltige Versiegler 

References

  1. 1.
    Ablal MA, Kaur JS, Cooper L et al (2009) The erosive potential of some alcopops using bovine enamel: an in vitro study. J Dent 37:835–839PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Autio-Gold J (2008) The role of chlorhexidine in caries prevention. Oper Dent 33:710–716PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banks PA, Richmond S (1994) Enamel sealants: a clinical evaluation of their value during fixed appliance therapy. Eur J Orthod 16:19–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benson PE, Parkin N, Millett DT et al (2004) Fluorides for the prevention of white spots on teeth during fixed brace treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD003809PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benson PE, Pender N, Higham SM (1999) An in situ caries model to study demineralization during fixed orthodontics. Clin Orthod Res 2:143–153PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Demito CF, Vivaldi-Rodrigues G, Ramos AL, Bowman SJ (2004) The efficacy of a fluoride varnish in reducing enamel demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets: an in vitro study. Orthod Craniofac Res 7:205–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Donly KJ, Istre S, Istre T (1995) In vitro enamel remineralization at orthodontic band margins cemented with glass ionomer cement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 107:461–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dubroc GC Jr, Mayo JA, Rankine CA (1994) Reduction of caries and of demineralization around orthodontic brackets: effect of a fluoride-releasing resin in the rat model. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 106:583–587PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Featherstone JD (2000) The science and practice of caries prevention. J Am Dent Assoc 131:887–899PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geiger AM, Gorelick L, Gwinnett AJ, Benson BJ (1992) Reducing white spot lesions in orthodontic populations with fluoride rinsing. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 101:403–407PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gmur R, Giertsen E, Veen MH van der et al (2006) In vitro quantitative light-induced fluorescence to measure changes in enamel mineralization. Clin Oral Investig 10:187–195PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu W, Featherstone JDB (2005) Prevention of enamel demineralization: an in vitro study using light-cured filled sealant. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 128:592–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kalha A (2004) Some evidence that fluoride during orthodontic treatment reduces occurrence and severity of white spot lesions. Evid Based Dent 5:98–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knösel M, Attin R, Becker K, Attin T (2007) External bleaching effect on the color and luminosity of inactive white-spot lesions after fixed orthodontic appliances. Angle Orthod 77:646–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kühnisch J, Heinrich-Weltzien R (2004) Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF): a literature review. Int J Comput Dent 7:325–338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Linton JL (1996) Quantitative measurements of remineralization of incipient caries. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 110:590–597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Melrose CA, Appleton J, Lovius BB (1996) A scanning electron microscopic study of early enamel caries formed in vivo beneath orthodontic bands. Br J Orthod 23:43–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nakata K, Nikaido T, Ikeda M et al (2009) Relationship between fluorescence loss of QLF and depth of demineralization in an enamel erosion model. Dent Mater J 28:523–529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Øgaard B, Rolla G, Arends J (1988a) Orthodontic appliances and enamel demineralization. Part 1. Lesion development. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 94:68–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Øgaard B, Rolla G, Arends J, ten Cate JM (1988b) Orthodontic appliances and enamel demineralization. Part 2. Prevention and treatment of lesions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 94:123–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Øgaard B (1989) Cariologic aspects of orthodontic treatment. Nor Tannlaegeforen Tid 99:802–805PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Øgaard B, Larsson E, Glans R et al (1997) Antimicrobial effect of a chlorhexidine-thymol varnish (Cervitec) in orthodontic patients. A prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Orofac Orthop 58:206–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Øgaard B, Larsson E, Henriksson T et al (2001) Effects of combined application of antimicrobial and fluoride varnishes in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 120:28–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Palamara J, Phakey PP, Rachinger WA, Orams HJ (1986) Ultrastructure of the intact surface zone of white spot and brown spot carious lesions in human enamel. J Oral Pathol Med 15:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pretty IA, Edgar WM, Higham SM (2003) The erosive potential of commercially available mouthrinses on enamel as measured by Quantitative Light-induced Fluorescence (QLF). J Dent 31:313–319PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pretty IA, Edgar WM, Higham SM (2002) Detection of in vitro demineralization of primary teeth using quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF). Int J Paediatr Dent 12:158–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pretty IA, Edgar WM, Higham SM (2004) The validation of quantitative light-induced fluorescence to quantify acid erosion of human enamel. Arch Oral Biol 49:285–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Salar DV, Garcia-Godoy F, Flaitz CM, Hicks MJ (2007) Potential inhibition of demineralization in vitro by fluoride-releasing sealants. J Am Dent Assoc 138:502–506PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tezel H, Ergucu Z, Onal B (2002) Effects of topical fluoride agents on artificial enamel lesion formation in vitro. Quintessence Int 33:347–352PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vieira A, Ruben JL, Huysmans MC (2005) Effect of titanium tetrafluoride, amine fluoride and fluoride varnish on enamel erosion in vitro. Caries Res 39:371–379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wenderoth CJ, Weinstein M, Borislow AJ (1999) Effectiveness of a fluoride-releasing sealant in reducing decalcification during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 166:629–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wu J, Donly ZR, Donly KJ, Hackmyer S (2010) Demineralization depth using QLF and a novel image processing software. Int J Dent Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Private Practice HannoverHannoverGermany
  2. 2.University Medical Center GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Medical StatisticsUniversity Medical Center GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  4. 4.Department of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology, and CariologyUniversity Medical Center GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations