Comparison of calcium-based technologies to remineralise enamel subsurface lesions using microradiography and microhardness

• Published in: Scientific reports Vol. 12; no. 1; p. 9888
• Main Authors: Fernando, James R., Walker, Glenn D., Park, Thomas Kwan-Soo, Shen, Peiyan, Yuan, Yi, Reynolds, Coralie, Reynolds, Eric C.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 14.06.2022; Nature Publishing Group; Nature Portfolio
• Subjects: 639/301; 692/699; 692/700; Calcium; Enamel; Humanities and Social Sciences; Lesions; multidisciplinary; Potassium phosphate; Scanning electron microscopy; Science; Science (multidisciplinary)
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-13905-8

Assessment of enamel subsurface lesion remineralisation is essential for the evaluation of novel remineralisation technologies. The gold standard to assess subsurface mineral gain of enamel lesions is transverse microradiography (TMR). However, some studies have utilised surface microhardness (SMH) to evaluate efficacy of remineralisation agents. The aim of this study was to assess remineralisation of enamel subsurface lesions using TMR and SMH after in vitro treatment with calcium-containing technologies, and to test correlation between the TMR and SMH measurements. The parameters obtained from the TMR and SMH analyses of enamel subsurface remineralisation were not significantly correlated. Furthermore, the enamel subsurface remineralisation as measured by TMR was significantly correlated with the water-soluble calcium concentration of the remineralisation products. Scanning electron microscopy revealed surface precipitates formed by specific remineralisation treatments obfuscated accurate assessment of remineralisation by SMH. It was concluded that TMR is a more appropriate method for analysis of enamel subsurface remineralisation, and that SMH values of remineralised enamel should be interpreted with caution. Using TMR the level of remineralisation (%R) by the different technologies was CPP-ACP/F (31.3 ± 1.4%); CPP-ACP (24.2 ± 1.4%); CaSO 4 /K 2 HPO 4 /F (21.3 ± 1.4%); f-TCP/F (20.9 ± 1.0%); Nano-HA/F (16.3 ± 0.3%); Nano-HA (15.3 ± 0.6%) and F alone control (15.4 ± 1.3%).