Effect of Glass Ionomer Cement and Fluoride Varnish on the Remineralization of Artificial Proximal Caries in Situ.

Objective: To compare the effect of glass ionomer cement (GIC) and fluoride varnish (F-varnish) on artificial proximal caries in situ. Study design: Two 1×3 mm² enamel slabs, divided into three 1×1 mm² windows,were prepared from each proximal surface of 18 premolars. Each slab was distributed into a control area,an intact enamel area and a test area. Artificial lesions were created on the control and test areas by immersing in demineralizing solution for 24 hours. The test windows were either applied with GIC or F-varnish and the full slabs inserted into orthodontic brackets as carriers, which were then bonded to the buccal surfaces of the 6 upper posterior teeth of 6 volunteers using non-fluoride dentifrice for 30 days. There was a 1-week washout period in this crossover study. The middle specimens of the three windows were cross-sectioned to analyze the carious lesion area by a polarized light microscope and calculated with Image-Pro plus® software.Results: The average carious lesion area under GIC was significantly less than that under F-varnish(p<0.05). Conclusion: GIC promotes more remineralization of artificial carious lesions on proximal surfaces than F-varnish.

Glass ionomer, Fluoride varnish, Artificial caries, Remineralization

1. Pitts NB. Monitoring of caries progression in permanent and primary posterior approximal enamel by bitewing radiography. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 11: 228–235, 1983.

2. Barbakow F, Imfeld T, Lutz F. Enamel remineralization: how to explain it to patients.Quintessence Int, 22: 341–347, 1991.

3. Zero DT. Dental caries process. Dent Clin North Am, 43: 635–664, 1999.

4. Mellberg JR. Remineralization. A status report for the American Jour-nal of Dentistry. Part I. Am J Dent, 1: 39–43, 1988a.

5. Mellberg JR. Remineralization. A status report for the American Jour-nal of Dentistry. Part II. Am J Dent, 1: 85–89, 1988b.

6. Alexander SA, Ripa LW. Effects of self-applied topical fluoride prepa-rations in orthodontic patients. Angle Orthod, 70: 424–430, 2000.

7. Petersson LG, Arthursson L, Ostberg C, Jonsson G, Gleerup A. Caries-inhibiting effects of different modes of Duraphat varnish application: a 3- year radiographic study. Caries Res, 25: 70–73, 1991.

8. Nelson DG, Jongebloed WL, Arends J. Morphology of enamel surfaces treated with topical fluoride agents: SEM considerations. J Dent Res, 62: 1201–1208, 1983.

9. Anusavice KJ. Efficacy of nonsurgical management of the initial caries lesion. J Dent Education, 61: 895–905, 1997.

10. Glasspoole EA, Erickson RL, Davidson CL. Effect of surface treat-ments on the bond strength of glass ionomers to enamel. Dent Mater, 18: 454–462, 2002.

11. Dionysopoulos P, Kotsanos N, Pataridou A. Fluoride release and uptake by four new fluoride releasing restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil, 30: 866–872, 2003.

12. Hatibovic-Kofman S, Suljak JP, Koch G. Remineralization of natural carious lesions with a glass ionomer cement. Swed Dent, J 21: 11–17, 1997.

13. Rezk-Lega F, Ogaard B, Arends J. An in vivo study on the merits of two glass ionomers for the cementation of orthodontic bands. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 99: 162–167, 1991.

14. Bravo M, Montero J, Bravo JJ, Baca P, Llodra JC. Sealant and fluoride varnish in caries: a randomized trial. J Dent Res, 84: 1138–1143, 2005.

15. Beiruti N, Frencken JE, van’t Hof MA, Taifour D, van Palenstein Hel-derman WH. Caries-preventive effect of a one-time application of com-posite resin and glass ionomer sealants after 5 years. Caries Res, 40: 52–59, 2006.

16. Twetman S, Skold-Larsson K, Modeer T. Fluoride concentration in whole saliva and separate gland secretions after topical treatment with three different fluoride varnishes. Acta Odontol Scand, 57: 263–266, 1999.

17. Seppa L, Tuutti H, Luoma H. Post-treatment effect of fluoride var-nishes in children with a high prevalence of dental caries in a commu-nity with fluoridated water. J Dent Res, 63: 221–222, 1984.

18. GC Corporation. GC PARTNER 2003 Retrieved online Jan 20, 2009 from: http://www.gcindiadental.com/images/Fuji7.pdf

19. Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT. Eight-year study on con-ventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth. Acta Odontol Scand, 62: 37–45, 2004.

20. Marinelli CB, Donly KJ, Wefel JS, Jakobsen JR, Denehy GE. An in vitro comparison of three fluoride regimens on enamel remineraliza-tion. Caries Res, 31: 418–422, 1997.

21. Castellano JB, Donly KJ. Potential remineralization of demineralized enamel after application of fluoride varnish. Am J Dent, 17: 462–464, 2004.

22. Arends J, Schuthof J. Fluoride content in human enamel after fluoride application and washing – an in vitro study. Caries Res, 9: 363–372, 1975.

23. Ogaard B, Arends J, Schuthof J, Rolla G, Ekstrand J, Oliveby A. Action of fluoride on initiation of early enamel caries in vivo. A microradi-ographical investigation. Caries Res, 20: 270–277, 1986.

24. Tyas MJ, Burrow MF. Adhesive restorative materials: a review. Aust Dent J, 49: 112–121, 2004.

25. Crisp S, Wilson AD. Reactions in glass ionomer cements: V. Effect of incorporating tartaric acid in the cement liquid. J Dent Res, 55: 1023–1031, 1976.

26. Smith ED, Martin FE. Acid etching of a glass ionomer cement base: SEM study. Aust Dent J, 35: 236–240, 1990.

27. Sorvari R, Meurman JH, Alakuijala P, Frank RM. Effect of fluoride varnish and solution on enamel erosion in vitro. Caries Res, 28: 227–232, 1994.