Effect of fluoride varnish on glass ionomer microhardness changes in endogenous acid erosion challenge

Figures & data

Table 1. Classification of subgroups.

Type of glass ionomer/subgroups		Surface treatments		Procedural steps
		Acid	Varnish
RMGI	RMGIa	+	−	a: Samples in both RMGIa and CGIa subgroups were immersed in synthetic gastric acid and incubated at 37 °C for 27 h. va: Samples in RMGIva and CGIva subgroups were treated with Fluor Protector fluoride varnish (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Lichtenstein) and were then immersed in synthetic gastric acid and incubated at 37 °C for 27 h. c: Samples in both RMGIc and CGIc subgroups were immersed in artificial saliva and incubated at 37 °C for 27 h (negative control). v: Samples in both RMGIv and CGIv subgroups were treated with Fluor Protector fluoride varnish and were then immersed in artificial saliva and incubated at 37 °C for 27 h.
	RMGIva	+	+
	RMGIv	−	+
	RMGIc	−	-
CGI	CGIa	+	-
	CGIva	+	+
	CGIv	−	+
	CGIc	−	-

Table 2. Mean and SD change in microhardness of subgroups (n = 10) and SD.

Subgroups Glass ionomer	c	a	v	va
RMGI	14.12 ± 15.51^cA	66.01 ± 16.64^aA	15.14 ± 5.75^cB	35.26 ± 20.99^bA
CGI	16.98 ± 20.41^bA	33.88 ± 34.67^abB	30.94 ± 17.25^bA	51.58 ± 16.87^aA

SD: Standard deviation

Groups denoted by the same decimal letter in the same row represent no significant difference, and groups denoted by the same capital letters in the same column represent no significant difference. (p > .05).

Data availability statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.