Fluoride bioavailability in saliva and plaque

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Different fluoride formulations may have different effects on caries prevention. It was the aim of this clinical study to assess the fluoride content, provided by NaF compared to amine fluoride, in saliva and plaque.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eight trained volunteers brushed their teeth in the morning for 3 minutes with either NaF or amine fluoride, and saliva and 3-day-plaque-regrowth was collected at 5 time intervals during 6 hours after tooth brushing. The amount of collected saliva and plaque was measured, and the fluoride content was analysed using a fluoride sensitive electrode. All subjects repeated all study cycles 5 times, and 3 cycles per subject underwent statistical analysis using the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Immediately after brushing the fluoride concentration in saliva increased rapidly and dropped to the baseline level after 360 minutes. No difference was found between NaF and amine fluoride. All plaque fluoride levels were elevated after 30 minutes until 120 minutes after tooth brushing, and decreasing after 360 minutes to baseline. According to the highly individual profile of fluoride in saliva and plaque, both levels of bioavailability correlated for the first 30 minutes, and the fluoride content of saliva and plaque was back to baseline after 6 hours.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Fluoride levels in saliva and plaque are interindividually highly variable. However, no significant difference in bioavailability between NaF and amine fluoride, in saliva, or in plaque was found.</p

Cariostatic effect of fluoride-containing restorative materials associated with fluoride gels on root dentin

Secondary caries is still the main cause of restoration replacement, especially on the root surface OBJECTIVE: This in vitro study evaluated the cariostatic effects of fluoride-containing restorative materials associated with fluoride gels, on root dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized complete block design was used to test the effects of the restorative systems, fluoride regimes and the interactions among them at different distances from restoration margins. Standardized cavities were prepared on 240 bovine root specimens and randomly assigned to 15 groups of treatments (n=16). Cavities were filled with the following restorative materials: Ketac-Fil (3M-ESPE); Vitremer (3M-ESPE); Dyract/Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply); Charisma/Gluma One Bond (Heraeus Kulzer) and the control, Z250/Single Bond (3M-ESPE). The specimens were subjected to a pH-cycling model designed to simulate high-caries activity. During the cycles, 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride, 2.0% neutral sodium fluoride or deionized/distilled water (control) was applied to the specimens for 4 min. The surface Knoop microhardness test was performed before (KHNi) and after (KHNf) the pH cycles at 100, 200 and 300 mm from the margins. Dentin microhardness loss was represented by the difference in initial and final values (KHNi - KHNf). Data were analyzed by Friedman's and Wilcoxon's tests, ANOVA and Tukey's test (&#945;=5%). RESULTS: The interaction of restorative systems and topical treatments was not significant (p=0.102). Dentin microhardness loss was lowest closer to the restoration. Ketac-fil presented the highest cariostatic effect. Vitremer presented a moderate effect, while Dyract and Charisma did not differ from the control, Z250. The effects of neutral and acidulated fluoride gels were similar to each other and higher than the control. CONCLUSION: Conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements as well as neutral and acidulated fluoride gels inhibit the progression of artificial caries adjacent to restorations. The associated effect of fluoride-containing restorative materials and gels could not be demonstrated

Fluoride retention in saliva and in dental biofilm after different home-use fluoride treatments

This single-blind, randomized, crossover study aimed at assessing the long-term fluoride concentrations in saliva and in dental biofilm after different home-use fluoride treatments. The study volunteers (n = 38) were residents of an area with fluoridated drinking water. They were administered four treatments, each of which lasted for one week: twice-daily placebo dentifrice, twice-daily fluoride dentifrice, twice-daily fluoride dentifrice and once-daily fluoride mouthrinse, and thrice-daily fluoride dentifrice. At the end of each treatment period, samples of unstimulated saliva and dental biofilm were collected 8 h after the last oral hygiene procedure. Fluoride concentrations in saliva and dental biofilm were analyzed using a specific electrode. The fluoride concentrations in saliva and dental biofilm 8 h after the last use of fluoride products did not differ among treatments. The results of this study suggest that treatments with home-use fluoride products have no long-term effect on fluoride concentrations in saliva and in dental biofilm of residents of an area with a fluoridated water supply