Microhardness and Roughness of Infiltrated White Spot Lesions Submitted to Different Challenges

A white spot lesion is the first clinical sign of a caries lesion and represents mineral loss from the enamel subsurface. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microhardness and surface roughness of white spot lesions after application of a resin infiltrant and subjection to different challe...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Operative dentistry Vol. 42; no. 4; pp. 428 - 435
Main Authors:	Neres, É Y, Moda, M D, Chiba, E K, Briso, Alf, Pessan, J P, Fagundes, T C
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 01-07-2017
Subjects:	Animals Cattle Composite Resins - chemistry Dental Enamel - pathology Dental Materials - chemistry Dentistry Hardness Tests In Vitro Techniques Random Allocation Surface Properties Tooth Demineralization - pathology Toothbrushing
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	A white spot lesion is the first clinical sign of a caries lesion and represents mineral loss from the enamel subsurface. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microhardness and surface roughness of white spot lesions after application of a resin infiltrant and subjection to different challenges. Caries-like lesions were induced in bovine enamel discs (n=50), and the specimens were randomly divided into five study groups (n=10): demineralized enamel (negative control, G1), infiltrated enamel (G2), infiltrated enamel submitted to brushing (G3), infiltrated enamel submitted to pH cycling (G4), and infiltrated enamel submitted to artificial aging (G5). Half of each enamel surface was used as its own positive control. Roughness data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by the Dunn test. Results from microhardness were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance, followed by the Tukey test for multiple comparisons. The level of significance was set at 5%. Microhardness and roughness values obtained from the test side of the specimens were significantly lower compared with the sound enamel for all groups. Microhardness values obtained for G2, G3, and G5 were not significantly different. Values found for G1 were significantly lower compared with those for G2, G3, and G5. The lowest microhardness values were observed for G4, which was significantly different from the other groups. Surface roughness was not significantly different between G2 and G3. The resin infiltrant presented superiority over the unprotected white spot lesions, as they were more resistant to mechanical and aging challenges. However, resin infiltration was not able to reestablish the properties of sound enamel and was not resistant to a new cariogenic challenge.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	0361-7734 1559-2863
DOI:	10.2341/16-144-l