In situ remineralisation response of different artificial caries-like enamel lesions to home-care and professional fluoride treatments

Abstract\ud \ud Background\ud Artificial lesions produced by different protocols might directly influence the response to different remineralising treatments. This study compared the response of different artificial caries-like enamel lesions to home-care and professional fluoride based-remineralising treatments in situ.\ud \ud \ud Methods\ud The tested demineralising protocols were methylcellulose- MC gel, polyacrylic acid - PA gel, tetraethyl methylene diphosphanate - TEMDP solution, and acetate- Buffer solution. The lesions were remineralised using an in situ model, following a crossover and double blind design. Twelve subjects wore intra-oral appliances during 3 phases (3 d each): control (C) (saliva); home-care F− treatment (FD) (1,100 ppm F− dentifrice, 2x1 min/day); and professional (FVD) (22,600 ppm F− varnish) plus FD. The de-remineralisation was measured by transverse microradiography-TMR and hardness (surface hardness/cross-sectional hardness, SH/CSH, respectively).\ud \ud \ud Results\ud For SH, lesions produced by PA gel were the only one showing significant differences among the remineralising treatments (C x FD x FVD); while the TEMDP lesion were not responsive to any fluoride treatment (for both SH/CSH). For TMR, there were no differences among the remineralising treatments, regardless of the type of lesion. Generally, the most responsive lesions to fluoride were the less demineralised lesions (considering hardness: PA gel and Buffer).\ud \ud \ud Conclusions\ud The type of lesion has influence on the surface remineralisation degree induced by home-care and professional fluoride treatments using this in situ model.We would like to thank the subjects who took part of the in situ research\ud and FAPESP by the financial support (scholarship for the first author, Process number: 2011/03907-1)