Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 344-347

Effect of different concentrations of fluoride varnish on enamel surface microhardness: An in vitro randomized controlled study


Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, The Oxford Dental College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Priya Subramaniam
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, The Oxford Dental College and Hospital, Hosur Road, Bommanahalli, Bengaluru - 560 068, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2319-5932.187172

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Dental caries occurs as a result of demineralization-remineralization phases occurring alternately at the tooth surface. Fluoride varnishes have a caries-inhibiting effect on teeth through remineralization. The resulting enamel is resistant to acid dissolution. Aim: The aim of this study is to assess enamel surface microhardness (SMH) following varnish application with different fluoride concentrations. Materials and Methods: Ninety freshly extracted, caries-free premolar teeth were used. Teeth were sectioned to obtain enamel blocks from the buccal surface of crown. The blocks were serially polished and flattened, embedded in acrylic blocks and smoothened to achieve a flat surface. The samples were divided into three groups, namely, A, B, and C consisting of 30 enamel blocks each. In Group A, Fluor Protector® varnish and in Group B, Bi-Fluorid 10® varnish was applied. Group C served as controls. All samples were subjected to a demineralization-remineralization cycle for 7 days. The SMH of enamel was measured. Data obtained was subjected to statistical analysis using the Student's t-test and one-way ANOVA. Results: The mean values of enamel SMH of Groups A and B were 496.99 ± 4.81 and 449.47 ± 7.37 Vickers Hardness Number, respectively. Conclusion: Fluor Protector varnish showed significantly higher enamel SMH than that of the other two groups (P < 0.05).


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1657    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded252    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal