Back to Search Start Over

A Comparison of the Fluoride 'Paint- On' vs Tray Application Techniques for Enamel Remineralisation.

Authors :
Keratibumrungpong K
Trairatvorakul C
Jirakran K
Govitvattana N
Source :
International dental journal [Int Dent J] 2024 Oct; Vol. 74 (5), pp. 1006-1015. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Apr 12.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Background: Fluoride gel treatment is not recommended for children < 6 years old due to its potential toxicity. Hence the aim of this study was to compare the effect of 1.23% acidulated-phosphate fluoride (APF) gel paint-on and the conventional tray application techniques on artificial, deciduous enamel carious lesions embedded on wearable appliances.<br />Methods: In a randomised crossover study, the volunteer children (n = 29) wore mandibular removable appliances containing embedded tooth specimens with artificial carious lesions. The volunteers had 3 different treatment protocols: (I) 0.4 mL non-fluoride (control) gel, (II) 0.4 mL paint-on 1.23% APF gel or (III) 5 mL 1.23% APF gel, 4 minutes tray application. After 1 hour, the appliances were removed and the specimens underwent an in vitro, 14 days of pH-cycling. The mean percentage reduction in fluorescence (ΔF, %) at baseline (ΔF <subscript>0</subscript> ) and after the pH-cycling (ΔF <subscript>1</subscript> ) were determined using quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital analysis. The mean ΔΔF (ΔF <subscript>1</subscript> -ΔF <subscript>0</subscript> ) was calculated to compare the differences between groups.<br />Results: The mean ΔΔF of groups I to III were -1.42 ± 1.49, 1.06 ± 2.11, and 1.12 ± 3.57 and -1.25 ± 1.44, 1.13 ± 1.84 and 1.44 ± 3.62 for the smooth surface and proximal surface lesions, respectively. The mean ΔΔF in the 2 treatment groups were significantly greater compared with the control group (P < .001). There was no significant difference in ΔΔF between the APF gel tray and paint-on groups either in the smooth surfaces, or the proximal surfaces (P = .629 and P = .613, respectively).<br />Conclusion: Our study, for the first time, indicates that the paint-on application of APF gel or the tray application of APF had a similar enamel remineralisation effect. Clinically, this implies that, particularly in younger children, the paint-on application of fluoride is less cumbersome, and possibly more tolerable with a lesser likelihood of fluoride ingestion than the tray application technique.<br />Trial Registration: Thai Clinical Trial Registry (https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20190724001).<br />Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None disclosed.<br /> (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1875-595X
Volume :
74
Issue :
5
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
International dental journal
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38614880
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.03.003