AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.6 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Basic Study | Publishing Language: Chinese | Open Access

Remineralization effect of nanohydroxyapatite on adjacent glazed surfaces

Beibei HUHai BAIWanping JIAYongqiang LIANG( )
Department of Orthodontics, College of Stomatology, North China University of Science and Technology, Tangshan 063000, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the effect of a nanohydroxyapatite suspension with a 10% mass fraction on enamel demineralization after adjacent enamel removal and to provide a reference for the clinical use of nanohydroxyapatite to prevent enamel demineralization after adjacent enamel removal.

Methods

Forty fresh extracted premolars were incised from the coronal surface of the crown after glazing and polishing with sand strips. Each tooth was made into two specimens. Eighty teeth were randomly divided into four groups: a blank group, a dolofluoride group, a dental mousse group and a 10% nanohydroxyapatite group. After 30 days of pH cycling in vitro, a microhardness tester was used to detect the enamel surface elements before and after deglazing treatment. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray energy dispersive spectrometry (EDS) were used to analyze the enamel surface elements.

Results

After the experiment, the microhardness values of the adjacent glazed specimens of the four groups were (128.18 ± 6.89) kg/mm2 in the blank group, (216.75 ±9.87) kg/mm2 in the dolefluoride group, (198.88 ± 4.76) kg/mm2 in the dental care group and (218.44 ± 7.88) kg/mm2 in the 10% nanohydroxyapatite group, which were significantly different (F=189.14, P < 0.001). The LSD-t test showed that there was no significant difference between the dolefluoride group and the 10% nanohydroxyapatite group (P < 0.05), but the differences between the other groups were statistically significant (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in the Ca/P ratio among the blank group (1.39 ± 0.08), the dolefluoride group (1.70 ± 0.11), the dental care group (1.54 ± 0.12) and the 10% nanohydroxyapatite group (1.71 ± 0.14) (F=10.539, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the dolefluoride group and the nanohydroxyapatite group after the experiment (P > 0.05), but there were significant differences among the other groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Dolerofluoride, dental protector and 10% nanohydroxyapatite can promote remineralization of enamel after enamel removal. The remineralization induced by 10% nanohydroxyapatite is similar to that induced by dolerofluoride.

CLC number: R783 Document code: A Article ID: 2096-1456(2019)04-0231-05

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Journal of Prevention and Treatment for Stomatological Diseases
Pages 231-235

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
HU B, BAI H, JIA W, et al. Remineralization effect of nanohydroxyapatite on adjacent glazed surfaces. Journal of Prevention and Treatment for Stomatological Diseases, 2019, 27(4): 231-235. https://doi.org/10.12016/j.issn.2096-1456.2019.04.005

2

Views

0

Downloads

0

Crossref

0

Scopus

Received: 25 September 2018
Revised: 09 November 2018
Published: 20 April 2019
© 2019 by Editorial Department of Journal of Prevention and Treatment for Stomatological Diseases