A Scanning Electron Microscope Evaluation of the Efficacy of Different Fluoride-releasing Dental Restorative Materials to Prevent Enamel Demineralization: An Study.

Aim: Aim of the present research was to investigate the effectiveness of various fluoride-releasing dental restorative agents in preventing demineralization of enamel.

Materials And Methods: Eighty human mandibular permanent molar teeth constituted the study group. All samples were subjected to storage in thymol, after which they were taken out to prepare alike proximal box in each. Inductions of artificial enamel surface lesions were done by placing the teeth in demineralizing solution for 96 hours. Subsequently, all 80 molars were randomly assigned to any of the four groups (i.e., 20 in every individual group) according to the restoration as group A: giomer (composite resin containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer fillers), group B: compomer (polyacid-modified composite resin), group C: resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), group D: fluoride-releasing composite. After this, the pH cycling was performed, and the samples were subjected to examination beneath scanning electron microscope (SEM).

Results: Higher mean areas of remineralization were noted when RMGIC (96.34 ± 0.06) was used followed by the compomer (109.52 ± 0.17), giomer (118.39 ± 0.82), and the fluoride-releasing composite group (129.27 ± 0.31) in that order. A statistically significant difference was seen amid the investigational groups that utilized different restorative agents ( <0.001). A pairwise evaluation that was performed revealed that except for the giomer group and the compomer group, a statistically significant difference ( <0.001) was found among the experimental groups.

Conclusion: This research infers that the RMGIC-treated samples exhibited significantly superior performance in preventing enamel demineralization in comparison to compomer, giomer as well as fluoride-releasing composites.

Clinical Significance: One among the highly frequently employed anticariogenic materials is fluorides. Owing to this characteristic, they are integrated into numerous restorative substances. Nevertheless, the quantity and speed of fluoride release differ in different agents, which translates to the efficacy of the restorative agent in avoiding demineralization about the restoration.