Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the Er:YAG laser and its association with fluoride (1.23% acidulate phosphate fluoride gel) on the prevention of enamel erosion. Sixty specimens were obtained from bovine enamel (4 × 4 mm), which were ground flat, polished, and randomly divided into five groups according to the preventive treatments: control-fluoride application; L--Er:YAG laser; L+F--laser + fluoride; F+L--fluoride + laser; L/F--laser/fluoride simultaneously. Half of the enamel surface was covered with nail varnish (control area), and the other half was pretreated with one of the preventive strategies to subsequently be submitted to erosive challenge. When the laser was applied, it was irradiated for 10 s with a focal length of 4 mm and 60 mJ/2 Hz. Fluoride gel was applied for 4 min. Each specimen was individually exposed to regular Coca-Cola® for 1 min, four times/day, for 5 days. Wear analysis was performed with a profilometer, and demineralization was assessed with an optical microscope. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (wear)/Dunn test and ANOVA/Fisher's exact tests. The group L/F was similar to control group. The other groups showed higher wear, which did not present differences among them. In the demineralization assessment, the groups F+L and L/F showed lower demineralization in relation to the other groups. It can be concluded that none preventive method was able to inhibit dental wear. The treatments L/F and F+L showed lower enamel demineralization.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10103-013-1463-6 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!