Advanced search
Start date
Betweenand
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Influence of Surfactants and Fluoride against Enamel Erosion

Full text
Author(s):
Zanatta, Rayssa Ferreira [1, 2] ; da Silva Avila, Daniele Mara [1] ; Miyamoto, Karen Mayumi [1] ; Gomes Torres, Carlos Rocha [1] ; Borges, Alessandra Buhler [1]
Total Authors: 5
Affiliation:
[1] Sao Paulo State Univ UNESP, Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Restorat Dent, Sao Jose Dos Campos - Brazil
[2] Univ Taubate, Dent Sch, Dept Restorat Dent, Taubate - Brazil
Total Affiliations: 2
Document type: Journal article
Source: Caries Research; v. 53, n. 1, p. 1-9, 2019.
Web of Science Citations: 0
Abstract

This study investigated the effect of surfactants associated with sodium fluoride (NaF) on enamel erosion prevention, using an erosion-remineralization in vitro model. Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), polysorbate 20 (P20), and cocoamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) were tested, at concentrations of 1.0 and 1.5%, and associated or not with NaF (275 ppm). The control groups were distilled water and the NaF solution. Bovine enamel samples (n = 12) were prepared and submitted to a 5-day cycling model: acid challenge (0.3% citric acid, pH 2.6, 4x/day), human saliva (2 h, 4x/day), and the treatment solutions (2 min, 2x/day). The protective potential of the agents against initial erosion was assessed by microhardness and the surface loss by profilometry. Enamel surface wettability was determined by goniometry, protein adsorption was measured by spectroscopy (FTIR), and the KOH-soluble fluoride was quantified. Goniometry showed that SLS and CAPB increased enamel wettability. No differences were found among the surfactants regarding protein adsorption. Microhardness showed that SLS reduced NaF protection. P20 (1 and 1.5%) and CAPB 1.5% presented a protective effect, but lower than the NaF solution. Profilometry showed that CAPB protected enamel, but no agent associated with NaF promoted a higher protection than the NaF solution alone. KOH-soluble fluoride analysis showed that all surfactants reduced the fluoride adsorption on the enamel surface. Therefore, the surfactants tested (except for P20) changed the enamel surface energy. The SLS decreased the protective potential of NaF on initial erosion, but no tested agent interfered with the protective effect of NaF on enamel erosive wear. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 13/12069-5 - Influence of surfactant agents on acquired pellicle protector effect during dental erosion development
Grantee:Rayssa Ferreira Zanatta
Support type: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
FAPESP's process: 13/16944-8 - Influence of different surfactants on the protective effect of pellicle on enamel erosion development
Grantee:Alessandra Buhler Borges
Support type: Regular Research Grants
FAPESP's process: 17/13799-8 - Antierosive potential of fluoridated solutions associated or not to film-forming polymers
Grantee:Alessandra Buhler Borges
Support type: Regular Research Grants
FAPESP's process: 14/06442-8 - Influence of different surfactant agents on the acquired pellicle formation on bovine enamel
Grantee:Karen Mayumi Miyamoto
Support type: Scholarships in Brazil - Scientific Initiation