This study aimed to analyse and compare the protective effect of buffered (pH 3.5) and native (pH 1.2) TiF₄ in comparison with NaF solutions on enamel erosion. Bovine samples were pretreated with 1.50% TiF₄ or 2.02% NaF (both 0.48 M F) solutions, each at a pH of 1.2 and 3.5. The control group received no fluoride pretreatment. Twenty samples per group were eroded with HCl (pH 2.6) for 10 × 60 s. Erosion was either investigated by profilometry (n = 10) or by determination of calcium release into the acid (n = 10). Additionally, the elemental surface composition was quantified by X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy in fluoridated but not eroded samples (6 samples per group). Scanning electron microscopy was performed prior and after erosion (2 samples per group). Cumulative enamel loss (μm) and calcium release (nmol/mm²) were analysed by repeated-measures ANOVA. The Ti and F surface composition was analysed by one-way ANOVA separately for each element. Only TiF₄ at pH 1.2 reduced enamel surface loss significantly. Calcium release was significantly reduced by TiF₄ and NaF at pH 1.2, but not by the solutions at pH 3.5. Samples pretreated with TiF₄ at pH 1.2 showed a significant increase in Ti, while NaF increased F concentration significantly. Only TiF₄ at pH 1.2 induced the formation of a glaze-like layer, which was still present after erosion. Enamel erosion can be significantly reduced by TiF₄ at pH 1.2 but not at pH 3.5. TiF₄ at pH 1.2 was more effective in protecting against enamel erosion than NaF.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyse and compare the protective effect of buffered (pH 3.5) and native (pH 1.2) TiF(4) in comparison to NaF solutions of same pH on dentin erosion. DESIGN: Bovine samples were pretreated with 1.50% TiF(4) or 2.02% NaF (both 0.48M F) solutions, each with a pH of 1.2 and 3.5. The control group received no fluoride pretreatment. Ten samples in each group were eroded with HCl (pH 2.6) for 10x60s. Erosion was analysed by determination of calcium release into the acid. Additionally, the surface and the elemental surface composition were examined by scanning electron microscopy (two samples in each group) and X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy in fluoridated but not eroded samples (six samples in each group). Cumulative calcium release (nmol/mm(2)) was statistically analysed by repeated measures ANOVA and one-way ANOVA at t=10min. RESULTS: TiF(4) and NaF at pH 1.2 decreased calcium release significantly, while TiF(4) and NaF at pH 3.5 were not effective. Samples treated with TiF(4) at pH 1.2 showed a significant increase of Ti, while NaF pretreatment increased F concentration significantly. TiF(4) at pH 1.2 led to the formation of globular precipitates occluding dentinal tubules, which could not be observed on samples treated with TiF(4) at pH 3.5. NaF at pH 1.2 but not at pH 3.5 induced the formation of surface precipitates covering dentinal tubules. CONCLUSION: Dentin erosion can be significantly reduced by TiF(4) and NaF at pH 1.2, but not at pH 3.5.1 TiF 4 and NaF at pH 1.2 but not at pH 3.5 are able to reduce dentin erosion Objective: This study aimed to analyse and compare the protective effect of buffered (pH 3.5) and native (pH 1.2) TiF 4 in comparison to NaF solutions of same pH on dentin erosion.Design: Bovine samples were pretreated with 1.50% TiF 4 or 2.02% NaF (both 0.48 M F) solutions, each with a pH of 1.2 and 3.5. The control group received no fluoride pretreatment.Ten samples in each group were eroded with HCl (pH 2.6) for 10 x 60s. Erosion was analysed by determination of calcium release into the acid. Additionally, the surface and the elemental surface composition were examined by scanning electron microscopy (two samples in each group) and X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy in fluoridated but not eroded samples (six samples in each group). Cumulative calcium release (nmol/mm 2 ) was statistically analysed by repeated measures ANOVA and one-way ANOVA at t = 10 min.Results: TiF 4 and NaF at pH 1.2 decreased calcium release significantly, while TiF 4 and NaF at pH 3.5 were not effective. Samples treated with TiF 4 at pH 1.2 showed a significant increase of Ti, while NaF pretreatment increased F concentration significantly. TiF 4 at pH 1.2 led to the formation of globular precipitates occluding dentinal tubules, which could not be observed on samples treated with TiF 4 at pH 3.5. NaF at pH 1.2 but not at pH 3.5 induced the formation of surface precipitates covering dentinal tubules.Conclusion: Dentin erosion can be significantly reduced by TiF 4 and NaF at p...