Differences in the Amount of Fluoride Release among Fluoride-Releasing Cements

JOURNAL TITLE: International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Author
1. Takashi Koike
2. Takayuki Ueda
3. Kaoru Sakurai
4. Koichiro Ogami
5. Mituhiro Yokomoto
6. Kyoko Tomura
ISSN
2231-6361
DOI
10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1111
Volume
4
Issue
3
Publishing Year
2014
Pages
4
Author Affiliations
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodontology, Tokyo Dental College, Chiba, Japan
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodontology, Tokyo Dental College, Chiba, Japan
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodontology, Tokyo Dental College, 1-2-2 Masago, Mihama-ku Chiba, Japan
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodon- tology, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Japan
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodon- tology, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Japan
    1. Department of Removable Prosthodontics and Gerodon- tology, Tokyo Dental College, Tokyo, Japan
  • Article keywords

    Abstract

    Purpose

    The abutment teeth of removable partial dentures are susceptible to root surface caries and secondary caries, and such caries sometimes result in crown destruction. In particular, in aged patients, this risk increases due to age-associated gingival recession, periodontal disease, decreased amount of saliva, and inadequate brushing caused by decreased finger motor function. Fluoride-releasing materials may prevent such caries. In this study, we evaluated the amounts of fluoride release from various fluoride-releasing cements based on the amount of fluoride release into artificial saliva.

    Materials and methods

    In this study, the following three types of cement were used: Vitremer 2 Paste (3M Health Care: V2 hereafter) and Fuji Luting EX (GC: EX hereafter) as resin-modified glass-ionomer cements, and Clearfil SA Luting (Kuraray Medical: SA hereafter) as a fluoride-containing adhesive resin cement. Using the method indicated by the manufactures, 5 samples (diameter, 8 mm; thickness, 2 mm) for each type of cement were prepared. The samples were immersed in artificial saliva (5 ml) and left at room temperature. The artificial saliva used for immersion was replaced every 24 hours until 14 days after the initiation of immersion and every 48 hours thereafter until after 30 days. Fluoride release was measured in the immersion solution using a combination fluoride ion-selective electrode connected to an ion analyzer. For statistical analysis, one-way analysis of variance and the Bonferroni test were performed to compare the amount of fluoride ion release among the groups (? = 0.05).

    Results

    The cumulative amount of fluoride ion release 30 days after the initiation of immersion was the highest for V2 (363.6 ± 87.1 μg/mm2), followed in order by EX (115.6 ± 7.9 μg/mm2) and SA (57.4 ± 23.9 μg/mm2). Significant differences were observed even from 1 day after the initiation of immersion between V2 and EX as well as SA. Concerning daily changes, the amount of fluoride ion release after 1 day was the highest for each type of cement; it was the highest for V2 (89.8 ± 13.5 μg/mm2), followed by SA (35.9 ± 8.3 μg/mm2) and EX (34.3 ± 3.2 μg/mm2). The amount of release gradually decreased after 2 days or more. Significant differences were observed from 1 day after the initiation of immersion between V2 and EX as well as SA. A significant difference between EX and SA was present from 2 until 4 days after the initiation of immersion.

    Conclusion

    V2 as a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement showed the highest amount of fluoride release, indicating continuous sustained fluoride release.

    How to cite this article

    Ogami K, Yokomoto M, Koike T, Ueda T, Tomura K, Sakurai K. Differences in the Amount of Fluoride Release among Fluoride-Releasing Cements. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2014;4(3):78-81.

    © 2019 Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.   |   All Rights Reserved