Premium
In vitro evaluation of surface properties of Pro Seal ® and Opal ® Seal TM in preventing white spot lesions
Author(s) -
Premaraj T. S.,
Rohani N.,
Covey D.,
Premaraj S.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
orthodontics and craniofacial research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.664
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1601-6343
pISSN - 1601-6335
DOI - 10.1111/ocr.12181
Subject(s) - demineralization , streptococcus mutans , enamel paint , sealant , penetration (warfare) , biofilm , buccal administration , dentistry , chemistry , distilled water , remineralisation , lactic acid , nuclear chemistry , tooth remineralization , fluoride , peracetic acid , bacteria , medicine , chromatography , biology , inorganic chemistry , organic chemistry , operations research , engineering , genetics , hydrogen peroxide
Structured Abstract Objectives To evaluate the surface properties of two commercially available sealants (Pro Seal ® ( PS ) and Opal ® Seal TM ( OS )) in terms of fluoride(F) release, biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus and the ability to resist acid penetration. Setting University of Nebraska Medical Center. Material & Methods Discs of similar diameter and thickness were made from OS and PS . Discs were soaked in double‐distilled water, and F released was measured with fluoride meter daily for 14 consecutive days, then at 21 and 28 days. Biofilm formation was evaluated with Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacilli grown on sealant discs using confocal microscopy. Extracted human teeth (n=8) with sealant‐coated buccal surfaces and untreated lingual surfaces were exposed to 0.1M lactic acid( pH =4.5) to test the acid penetration. After 1‐4 weeks of exposure, teeth were subjected to microhardness testing and SEM microscopy. Results PS released significantly higher levels of F than OS . PS showed more S. mutans adherence than OS , whereas Lactobacillus did not show any differences in adherence. Both sealants protected enamel surfaces, showing statistically significant difference in the depth of acid penetration compared to their unsealed control sides. Conclusion F release was adequate to aid in remineralization, although clinically it would not likely aid in preventing demineralization as there was no prolonged release of F by both sealants tested. S. mutans adherence to OS surface was less compared to PS surface, which could be of relevance in biofilm formation and white spot lesions. Both sealants protected enamel surfaces from acid penetration.