الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 108 |  |  |
| | | from | 108 | | |
Abstract
This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of different remineralizing agents and resin infiltration on resistance to demineralization of artificial enamel lesions. A total of 56 specimens were prepared for cross-sectional microhardness testing. Specimens were assigned to eight main groups (n = 7 each) according to the surface treatment performed; artificial saliva, Fluoride, CPP-ACP, CPP-ACFP and each of the previous surface treatments followed by resin infiltrant (RI). All treated artificial enamel lesions were subjected to pH cycling. Each specimen was measured at five predetermined depths (100,150,200,250,300). In addition, seven specimens of sound enamel served as a positive control.
Cross-sectional microhardness (CSH) of all specimens was measured using Vickers’s microhardness tester. A representative specimen from each group was evaluated under a polarized light microscope. The mean and standard deviation for microhardness of all specimens were calculated. Two-way ANOVA showed that the interaction between surface treatment and depth of measurement had no significant effect on cross-sectional microhardness of artificial enamel lesions. Meanwhile, different types of surface treatment revealed a significant effect on the mean CSH of artificial enamel lesions. The highest value of mean CSH was found in specimens of sound enamel and CPP-ACFP. Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference between CPP-ACFP (with or without RI) and Fluoride (with or without RI). In addition, no significant difference in mean CSH was recorded between all the specimens treated with RI. Meanwhile, the lowest mean CSH value was recorded by artificial saliva. Additionally, artificial saliva (with or without RI) and CPP-ACP (with or without RI) showed no statistically significant difference in mean CSH.
The depth of measurement showed no statistically significant effect on the mean CSH of artificial enamel lesions. Meanwhile, artificial saliva, CPP-ACP and CPP-ACP /RI recorded the lowest mean CSH values at 100µm,150µm and up-to 250µm for CPP-ACP /RI compared to sound enamel. Furthermore, at 200µm artificial saliva (with or without RI) showed statistically significant low mean CSH compared to sound enamel. Finally, 300µm depths revealed no significant difference between the mean CSH of different surface treatments
Conclusions:
Within the limitations of this study, the following could be concluded:
1. Regarding the post-treatment demineralization of treated artificially induced white spot lesions in enamel.
a. Remineralizing agents are effective in resisting demineralization and their effect is not potentiated by resin infiltration treatment.
b. CPP-ACFP is more effective than CPP-ACP cream.
c. Single application of Fluoride varnish (ƒTCP) is beneficial.
2. Resin infiltration is not affected by prior remineralization treatments.