Fluoride release from two types of fluoride-containing orthodontic adhesives: Conventional versus resin-modified glass ionomer cements-An in vitro study.

IntroductionDevelopment of white spot lesions (WSLs) during orthodontic treatment is a common risk factor. Fixation of the orthodontic appliances with glass ionomer cements could reduce the prevalence of WSL's due to their fluoride release capacities. The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences of fluoride release properties from resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer cements (GICs).MethodsThe resin-modified GICs Fuji ORTHO LC (GC Orthodontics), Meron Plus QM (VOCO), as well as the conventional GICs Fuji ORTHO (GC Orthodontics), Meron (VOCO) and Ketac Cem Easymix (3M ESPE) were tested in this study. The different types of GICs were applied to hydroxyapatite discs according to the manufacturer's instructions and stored in a solution of TISAB III (Total Ionic Strength Adjustment Buffer III) and fluoride-free water at 37°C. Fluoride measurements were made after 5 minutes, 2 hours, 24 hours, 14 days, 28 days, 2 months, 3 months and 6 months. One factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for the overall comparison of the cumulative fluoride release (from measurement times of 5 minutes to 6 months) between the different materials with the overall level of significance set to 0.05. Tukey's post hoc test was used for post hoc pairwise comparisons in the cumulative fluoride release between the different materials.ResultsThe cumulative fluoride release (mean ± sd) in descending order was: Fuji ORTHO LC (221.7 ± 10.29 ppm), Fuji ORTHO (191.5 ± 15.03 ppm), Meron Plus QM (173.0 ± 5.89 ppm), Meron (161.3 ± 7.84 ppm) and Ketac Cem Easymix (154.6 ± 6.09 ppm) within 6 months. Analysis of variance detected a significant difference in the cumulative fluoride release between at least two of the materials (rounded p-value ConclusionFluoride ions were released cumulatively over the entire test period for all products. When comparing the two products from the same company (Fuji ORTHO LC vs. Fuji ORTHO from GC Orthodontics Europe GmbH and Meron Plus QM vs. Meron from VOCO GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), it can be said that the resin-modified GICs have a higher release than conventional GICs. The highest individual fluoride release of all GICs was at 24 hours. A general statement, whether resin-modified or conventional GICs have a higher release of fluoride cannot be made

Fluoride Ion Release Characteristics of Fluoride-Containing Varnishes—An In Vitro Study

Despite the latest advances in orthodontic treatment, white spot lesions remain a common side effect of fixed appliance therapy. An effective treatment for the prevention of white spot lesions is the use of fluoride-containing products. The aim of the present in vitro study was to check the durability of the tested products for their fluoride release into the surrounding solution. Three varnishes (Protecto CaF2 Nano one-step seal, Bifluorid 12 single dose, and Fluor Protector S) were applied to hydroxyapatite discs and kept in diluted Total Ionic Strength Adjustment Buffer III (TISAB III) solution for fluoride ion release measurement. A group of clear hydroxyapatite discs served as the control group. The carrier discs (N = 40) underwent three thermal cycling runs for 20 days. Before the first run and after each run, the fluoride ion concentration in the solution was measured at appointed times (T) T0, T1, T2, and T3. Fluoride ion release was highest at T1 for all products (median values for Protecto CaF2 Nano one-step seal: 0.09 ppm, Bifluorid 12 single dose: 37.67 ppm, and Fluor Protector S: 3.36 ppm) except for the control group, showing its peak at T0 (0.04 ppm). There was a significant difference between the tested fluoride varnishes at all measurement times. Bifluorid 12 achieved significantly higher fluoride release values than the other products (p < 0.05 at all measurement times). A solitary product application of only once or twice per year, as stated by the manufacturers, cannot be supported