4.6 Article

In vitro remineralization effects of grape seed extract on artificial root caries

期刊

JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
卷 36, 期 11, 页码 900-906

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.07.011

关键词

Remineralization; Artificial caries; Root caries; Dentin; Grape seed extract; Proanthocyanidin

资金

  1. NIH-NIDCR [DE017740]
  2. U.S. Army Dental Trauma Research Detachment, Great Lakes, IL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Grape seed extract (GSE) contains proanthocyanidins (PA), which has been reported to strengthen collagen-based tissues by increasing collagen cross-links. We used an in vitro pH-cycling model to evaluate the effect of GSE on the remineralization of artificial root caries. Sound human teeth fragments obtained from the cervical portion of the root were stored in a demineralization solution for 96 h at 37 degrees C to induce artificial root caries lesions. The fragments were then divided into three treatment groups including: 6.5% GSE, 1000 ppm fluoride (NaF), and a control (no treatment). The demineralized samples were pH-cycled through treatment solutions, acidic buffer and neutral buffer for 8 days at 6 cycles per day. The samples were subsequently evaluated using a microhardness tester, polarized light microscopy (PLM) and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Fisher's tests (p < 0.05). GSE and fluoride significantly increased the microhardness of the lesions (p < 0.05) when compared to a control group. PLM data revealed a significantly thicker mineral precipitation band on the surface layer of the GSE-treated lesions when compared to the other groups (p > 0.05), which was confirmed by CLSM. We concluded that grape seed extract positively affects the demineralization and/or remineralization processes of artificial root caries lesions, most likely through a different mechanism than that of fluoride. Grape seed extract may be a promising natural agent for non-invasive root caries therapy. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据