Objectives: to compare in vitro the ability of two different fluoride varnishes to resist demineralization of human enamel adjacent to bonded orthodontic brackets.

Methods: One hundred ten human maxillary third molars were randomly divided into 3 groups. A metal orthodontic bracket was bonded to the buccal surface of each tooth with composite-resin Transbond XT. All teeth were painted with nail polish, except for a 1mm wide window of exposed enamel occlusal to the bracket. Group 1 (n=36) received one application of Duraphat fluoride varnish (D). Group 2 (n=36) received one application of Fluor Protector fluoride varnish (FP). Group 3 (n=38) received no fluoride varnish (control). The teeth were stored in artificial saliva 12 hours before subjecting them to twice daily 1 hour exposures to an artificial caries solution and tooth brushing without a dentifrice. Cycling between artificial saliva, brushing, and caries solutions stopped on day 27. Teeth were sectioned and enamel lesion depths measured using polarized light microscopy and Image Pro Plus software. Analysis of variance and the Bonferroni test were used to compare lesion depths of the 3 groups.

Results: Mean lesion depths differed significantly between the groups, ANOVA P≤ 0.0001. The Bonferroni test revealed a significant difference between any two treatment groups P≤ 0.0001. Group 3, control, had the largest mean lesion depth (90.5± 14.4µ). Group 1 (D) had an intermediate mean lesion depth (31.5± 12.4µ). Group 2 had the smallest mean lesion depth (12.9± 6.1µ). When compared to control Group 3, mean lesion depths in Groups 1 and 2 were reduced 65% and 86% respectively.

Conclusion: While both fluoride varnishes significantly reduced enamel demineralization, FP was significantly more effective than D.

Back to the Dental Materials: VIII - Others-Non-metallic Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 83rd General Session (March 9-12, 2005)

Top Level Search