Enamel demineralization during orthodontic treatment. Aetiology and prevention

Chang, HS; Walsh, L. J.; Freer, T. J.

doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.1997.tb00138.x

Cited by 151 publications

(143 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2 This large variation probably arises as a result of the variety of methods used to assess and score the presence of decalcification. There is also inconsistency on whether idiopathic lucencies are included or excluded in the study design.…”

Section: Enamel Demineralisation/cariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontics. Part 6: Risks in orthodontic treatment

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Enamel Demineralisation/cariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontics. Part 6: Risks in orthodontic treatment

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1 WSLs have been defined as clinically detectable manifestations of subsurface enamel demineralization, representing the first stage of caries formation. 2 Mineral loss in these lesions can be up to 50% of the inorganic content 1 and can result in changes in hardness and refractive index of the enamel, causing a scattering of light and giving the enamel a chalky, opaque appearance. 3 WSLs are both an esthetic concern and a disconcerting visible sign of enamel demineralization secondary to orthodontic treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A novel biomimetic orthodontic bonding agent helps prevent white spot lesions adjacent to brackets

Manfred

Covell

Crowe

et al. 2012

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare changes in enamel microhardness adjacent to orthodontic brackets after using bonding agents containing various compositions of bioactive glass compared to a traditional resin adhesive following a simulated caries challenge. Materials and Methods: Extracted human third molars (n 5 10 per group) had orthodontic brackets bonded using one of four novel bioactive glass (BAG)-containing orthodontic bonding agents (BAG-Bonds) or commercially available Transbond-XT. The four new adhesives contained BAG in varying percentages incorporated into a traditional resin monomer mixture. Teeth were cycled through low-pH demineralizing and physiologic-pH remineralizing solutions once each day over 14 days. Microhardness was measured on longitudinal sections of the teeth 100, 200, and 300 mm from the bracket edge and beneath the brackets, at depths of 25 to 200 mm from the enamel surface. Normalized hardness values were compared using three-way analysis of variance. Results: Significantly less reduction in enamel microhardness was found with the experimental adhesives at depths of 25 and 50 mm at all distances from the bracket edge. In all groups, there were no significant changes in enamel microhardness past 125-mm depth. Results varied with the different BAG-Bonds, with 81BAG-Bond showing the smallest decrease in enamel microhardness. Conclusions: The BAG-Bonds tested in this study showed a reduction in the amount of superficial enamel softening surrounding orthodontic brackets compared to a traditional bonding agent. The results indicate that clinically, BAG-Bonds may aid in maintaining enamel surface hardness, therefore helping prevent white spot lesions adjacent to orthodontic brackets. (Angle Orthod. 2013;83:97-103.)

show abstract

“…1,2 And these are generally considered to be the precursor of frank enamel carious lesions. 3 The white appearance is due to an optical phenomenon which is caused by mineral loss in the surface or subsurface enamel.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%