Abstract Regular use of toothpaste with fluoride (F) concentrations of ≥ 1000 ppm has been shown to contribute to reducing caries increment. However, when used by children during the period of dental development, it can lead to dental fluorosis. Objective: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the in vitro effect of a toothpaste formulation with reduced fluoride (F) concentration (200 ppm) supplemented with sodium trimetaphosphate (TMP: 0.2%), Xylitol (X:16%), and Erythritol (E: 4%) on dental enamel demineralization. Methodology: Bovine enamel blocks were selected according to initial surface hardness (SHi) and then divided into seven experimental toothpaste groups (n=12). These groups included 1) no F-TMP-X-E (Placebo); 2) 16% Xylitol and 4% Erythritol (X-E); 3) 16% Xylitol, 4% Erythritol and 0.2%TMP (X-E-TMP); 4) 200 ppm F (no X-E-TMP: (200F)); 5) 200 ppm F and 0.2% TMP (200F-TMP); 200 ppm F, 16% Xylitol, 4% Erythritol, and 0.2% TMP (200F-X-E-TMP); and 7) 1,100 ppm F (1100F). Blocks were individually treated 2×/day with slurries of toothpastes and subjected to a pH cycling regimen for five days (DES: 6 hours and RE: 18 hours). Then, the percentage of surface hardness loss (%SH), integrated loss of subsurface hardness (ΔKHN), fluoride (F), calcium (Ca), and phosphorus (P) in enamel were determined. The data were analyzed by ANOVA (1-criterion) and the Student-Newman-Keuls test (p<0.001). Results: We found that the 200F-X-E-TMP treatment reduced %SH by 43% compared to the 1100F treatments (p<0.001). The ΔKHN was ~ 65% higher with 200F-X-E-TMP compared to 1100F (p<0.001). The highest concentration of F in enamel was observed on the 1100F treatment (p<0.001). The 200F-X-E-TMP treatment promote higher increase of Ca and P concentration in the enamel (p<0.001). Conclusion: The association of 200F-X-E-TMP led to a significant increase of the protective effect on enamel demineralization compared to the 1100F toothpaste.

Abstract Dental applications based on the unique characteristics of amorphous calcium phosphate stabilized by casein phosphopeptides (CPP-ACP) have been proposed, as well as the improvement of its properties. Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine the ability of topically applied CPP-ACP from a commercial product to remineralize subsurface lesions when applied for extended periods of time (3 h and 8 h). Material and Methods: Artificially induced carious lesions were produced in 50 bovine enamel blocks previously selected by surface hardness. After treatments with gel without F and CPP-ACP applied for 1 minute (Placebo); 2% NaF neutral gel applied for 1 minute (Fluoride 1 min); CPP-ACP applied for 3 min (ACP 3 min); and CPP-ACP applied for 3 h (ACP 3 h) and for 8 h (ACP 8 h), the enamel blocks were submitted to the remineralization pH-cycling. Surface hardness and synchrotron micro-tomography were used to determine the percentage of surface hardness recovery (%SHR) and to calculate mineral concentration (gHAp.cm−3), respectively. The data were submitted to ANOVA followed by the Student-Newman-Keuls test (p<0.05). Results: Fluoride gel presented higher %SHR followed by ACP 3 min (p<0.001). No difference (p = 0.148) was found for Placebo, ACP 3 h and ACP 8 h groups for %SHR. Fluoride gel showed greater mineral concentration (p<0.001) when compared with the other groups. ACP 3 min demonstrated a significant difference (p<0.001) from ACP 3 h and ACP 8 h. The ACP 3 h and 8 h presented a subsurface lesion with development of laminations in all blocks. Conclusion: In this in vitro study the use of CPP-ACP for extended periods of time did not produce an additive effect in the remineralization process.

Este estudo avaliou as propriedades de microdureza de superfície e liberação de flúor de 5 materiais restauradores (Ketac-Fil Plus, Vitremer, Fuji II LC, Freedom e Fluorofil) em dois meios de imersão: água destilada/deionizada e modelo de ciclagem de pH (4,6). Doze corpos-de-prova de cada material foram confeccionados e tiveram a microdureza de superfície inicial (MSI) determinada utilizando o microdurômetro Shimadzu HMV-2000 Micro Hardness Tester (carga estática Knoop). Os corpos-de-prova foram submetidos a ciclos de 6 e 18 h para os dois meios de imersão. A cada final de ciclo as soluções foram substituídas e armazenadas. Após 15 dias de imersão, a microdureza de superfície final (MSF) e a liberação de flúor foram determinadas. A dosagem de flúor foi feita com um eletrodo específico combinado para íon flúor (9609 BN - Orion) e analisador de íons digital (Orion 720 A). As variáveis MSI, MSF e liberação de flúor foram submetidas à análise de variância e teste de Tukey (p<0,05). Houve diferença estatisticamente significante na MSF entre os meios de imersão para o Vitremer (pH 4,6 = 40,2 ± 1,5; água = 42,6 ± 1,4), Ketac-Fil Plus (pH 4,6 = 73,4 ± 2,7; água = 58,2 ± 1,3) e Fluorofil (pH 4,6 = 44,3 ± 1,8; água = 38,4 ± 1,0). O Ketac-Fil Plus (9,9 ± 18,0) e o Fluorofil (4,4 ± 1,3) liberaram mais flúor na água; o Vitremer (7,4 ± 7,1), Fuji II LC (5,7 ± 4,7) e o Freedom (2,1 ± 1,7) no pH 4,6. A microdureza e liberação de flúor dos materiais restauradores estudados variaram de acordo com o meio de imersão.

This study evaluated the surface microhardness and fluoride release of 5 restorative materials - Ketac-Fil Plus, Vitremer, Fuji II LC, Freedom and Fluorofil - in two storage media: distilled/deionized water and a pH-cycling (pH 4.6). Twelve specimens of each material, were fabricated and the initial surface microhardness (ISM) was determined in a Shimadzu HMV-2000 microhardness tester (static load Knoop). The specimens were submitted to 6- or 18-h cycles in the tested media. The solutions were refreshed at the end of each cycle. All solutions were stored for further analysis. After 15-day storage, the final surface microhardness (FSM) and fluoride release were measured. Fluoride dose was measured with a fluoride-specific electrode (Orion 9609-BN) and digital ion analyzer (Orion 720 A). The variables ISM, FSM and fluoride release were analyzed statistically by analysis of variance and Tukey's test (p<0.05). There was significant difference in FSM between the storage media for Vitremer (pH 4.6 = 40.2 ± 1.5; water = 42.6 ± 1.4), Ketac-Fil Plus (pH 4.6 = 73.4 ± 2.7; water = 58.2 ± 1.3) and Fluorofil (pH 4.6 = 44.3 ± 1.8; water = 38.4 ± 1.0). Ketac-Fil Plus (9.9 ± 18.0) and Fluorofil (4.4 ± 1.3) presented higher fluoride release in water, whereas Vitremer (7.4 ± 7.1), Fuji II LC (5.7 ± 4.7) and Freedom (2.1 ± 1.7) had higher fluoride release at pH 4.6. Microhardness and fluoride release of the tested restorative materials varied according to the storage medium.