4.6 Article

The influence of different irradiation doses and desensitizer application on demineralization of human dentin

Journal

ORAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue 9, Pages E80-E84

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.03.005

Keywords

Radiation caries; Irradiation doses; Desensitizer; Demineralization; Dentin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of different irradiation doses after desensitizer application on the onset of initial demineralization of human dentin in situ. The root surfaces of 45 freshly extracted caries-free human molars were cleaned, thereby removing the cementum. From each tooth two root dentin specimens were prepared. The specimens were distributed among the following experimental groups: 0, 0.5, 1, 2 and 5 Gy. The irradiation dose was fractionally applied (0.5 Gy/day). One dentin specimen of each group was inserted into both buccal aspects of nine intraoral mandibular appliances. On one side the specimens were additionally coated with the desensitizer Hyposen (H). On the other side, the specimens were left untreated (C). The appliances were worn by nine persons for five weeks day and night. During meals, the appliance was stored in 10% sucrose solution. After the in situ period, slabs (150 mu m) were ground and studied using a polarized light microscope. Concerning radiation dose, significant differences were observed between the control and 5 Gy group (p < 0.05, Tukeys test). Pairwise comparison showed that lesion depths in groups treated with Hyposen were significantly decreased. Within the limitations of this study it can be concluded that higher radiation doses seem to increase the caries susceptibility of dentin. The additional application of a desensitizer hampers the demineralization and might have a caries-protective effect on exposed irradiated root surfaces. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available