上海口腔医学

上海口腔医学 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (5): 493-497.doi: 10.19439/j.sjos.2021.05.009

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

玻璃离子保护膜与氟保护漆对牙釉质脱矿的预防和再矿化作用

吴慧1, 刘桦2, 刘文2, 刘义琮1, 杨芳2   

  1. 1.青岛大学 口腔医学院,山东 青岛 266003;
    2.青岛市市立医院 口腔医学中心,山东 青岛 266011
  • 收稿日期:2021-01-12 修回日期:2021-03-17 出版日期:2021-10-25 发布日期:2021-11-08
  • 通讯作者: 杨芳,E-mail:Fancy-yf@163.com
  • 作者简介:吴慧（1994-）,女,硕士,住院医师,E-mail:17853293202@163.com

Effect of protection and remineralization of glass ionomer protective film and fluoride varnish on enamel: an in vitro study

WU Hui1, LIU Hua2, LIU Wen2, LIU Yi-cong1, YANG Fang2   

  1. 1. School of Stomatology, Qingdao University. Qingdao 266003;
    2. Stomatology Center, Qingdao Municipal Hospital. Qingdao 266011, Shandong Province, China
  • Received:2021-01-12 Revised:2021-03-17 Online:2021-10-25 Published:2021-11-08

PDF (PC)

261

摘要： 目的: 比较玻璃离子保护膜与氟保护漆对牙釉质脱矿的预防和再矿化作用。方法: 选择122颗正畸减数拔除的前磨牙,制成釉质块,随机选择2个,进行扫描电镜（SEM）观察,其余用于两部分实验。①釉质脱矿预防实验 （实验A）—选择60个釉质块,随机分为3组（n=20）,分别使用玻璃离子保护膜（A1组）、氟保护漆（A2组）,对照组（A3组）不予处理;②釉质再矿化实验（实验B）—选择60个釉质块,预脱矿72 h后,随机分为3组(B1、B2、B3,n=20),处理方法同预防釉质脱矿各组。实验A、B共6组样本均经人工脱矿液和人工唾液交替pH循环处理30 d。采用SEM观察釉质表面形貌,显微硬度计测定釉质表面显微硬度（SMH）变化,X线能谱分析仪分析釉质表面钙磷比。采用SPSS 26.0软件包对数据进行统计学分析。结果: 釉质脱矿预防实验,未作处理的牙釉质表面平坦、均匀,A1组釉质表面基本完整,A2组釉质表面可见大量片状沉积物,A3组呈现典型的脱矿导致的蜂窝状结构。各组间ΔSMH两两比较,A1组<A2组<A3组(P<0.05),钙磷比值依次为A1组>A2组>A3组(P<0.05)。釉质再矿化实验,SEM结果显示,B1、B2组均有沉积物附着于釉质表面,B3组釉质表面凹凸不平,呈蜂窝状。各组间ΔSMH两两比较,B1组>B2组>B3组(P<0.05)。钙磷比值依次为B1组>B2组>B3组(P<0.05)。结论: 玻璃离子保护膜和氟保护漆均可预防和治疗牙釉质脱矿,玻璃离子保护膜由于其耐磨、持久,具有更好的保护和再矿化作用。

关键词: 玻璃离子, 氟保护漆, 釉质脱矿

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the remineralization and protection effect of glass ionomer protective film and fluoride varnish on enamel. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two premolars were collected and made into enamel blocks, two enamel blocks were randomly selected for scanning electron microscope(SEM) observation, the others were used for two experiments. In enamel protection test (experimental A), 60 enamel blocks were divided into 3 groups (n=20) randomly and treated with glass ionomer protective film(A1) and fluoride varnish(A2), the control group(A3) was not treated. In remineralization test (experimental B), sixty enamel blocks were demineralized for 72 h, which were randomly divided into 3 groups(B1, B2 and B3)(n=20), and the treatment method was the same as that of the enamel protection group. To simulate oral environment, in experiment A and B, six groups of samples were treated with pH cycling in demineralization liquid and artificial saliva alternately for 30 days. The surface morphology of enamel was observed under SEM, surface microhardness(SMH) changes of enamel was measured by microhardness tester, the calcium-phosphorus ratio of the enamel surface was analyzed by X-ray energy spectrum analyzer. The data was analyzed statistically by using SPSS 26.0 software package. RESULTS: In enamel protection test, the results of SEM observation showed that the untreated enamel surface was flat and even. After treatment with demineralization liquid, group A1 was basically intact. In group A2, a large number of flaky sediments were found on the enamel surface. Group A3 presented typical honeycomb structure caused by demineralization. Pairwise comparison of ΔSMH among the groups showed A1<A2<A3(P<0.05). The results of calcium-phosphorus ratio by X-ray energy spectrum analyzer was group A1>A2>A3(P<0.05). In remineralization test, the results of SEM observation showed that group B1 and B2 all had deposits adhered to the enamel surface. The surface of group B3 enamel was rough and uneven, and showed the shape of a honeycomb. Pairwise comparison of ΔSMH among the groups showed B1>B2>B3(P<0.05). The results of calcium-phosphorus ratio by X-ray energy spectrum analyzer was group B1>B2>B3(P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both glass ionomer protective film and fluoride varnish can prevent and cure enamel demineralization, while glass ionomer protective film is more effective in protection and remineralization because of its wear resistance and durability.

Key words: Glass ionomer, Enamel demineralization, Fluoride varnish

中图分类号: