Demineralization Protection of a New Protective Coating

Objectives:    Evaluate the ability to protect underlying and adjacent enamel from in vitro demineralization of a new protective coating, EXM-713, a resin-modified glass ionomer, compared to Ultradent™ Ultraseal XT™ Plus™ Sealant (US), Pulpdent™ Embrace™ Wetbond™ Sealant (EW), 3M™ ESPE™ Vitrebond™ Plus Light Cure Liner/Base (VBP), and GC™ Fuji™ Triage™ Glass Ionomer Sealant (FT).

Methods:    Polished bovine enamel specimens (n=10) having areas with acid-resistant nail varnish coating, test coating, and uncoated  were soaked in 0.1M lactic acid gel for 20d at 37°C as a simulated cariogenic challenge. Mineral loss (DZ) was determined by cross-sectional microhardness of the enamel under the varnish, under the test coating, and the adjacent uncoated enamel at 0.5mm and 2mm from the coating.  Data were analyzed via one-way ANOVA and compared with Tukey's T-test (p<0.05).

Results:   Mean(SD) mineral loss (DZ, vol%-micron) are shown. Means with same letter designations within a row are not statistically significantly different.

Conclusions:  All coating materials provided physical barrier protection against the acid challenge.  In addition to protecting the underlying enamel against demineralization, each coating is expected to provide clinically meaningful protection against demineralization and tooth decay, when applied according to manufacturer's instructions.  EXM-713, VBP, and FT exhibited statistically significantly greater protection against the acid challenge of adjacent enamel, both at 0.5mm and 2mm from the coating, than EW or US. 

Supported in part by a 3M Non-tenured Faculty Grant.