Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Lacquer”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13Linked to original sources
PubMed1989

[Long-term use of fluoride lacquer in preventive care of school children in area of basic care].

The spread of caries in the city of Rostock was studied from 1979 to 1988 in pupils from classes 1 to 8 where the fluoride varnish application three times a year (Duraphat) was the most important caries prophylaxis measure. All children were included in the evaluation, even those who had entered the school for the first time during the study period and had not had any prior prophylactic treatment. A special study was also made in a single class in the 1st and 6th years, respectively, to compare varnish application by cotton swabs with barrel ampoule injection. A significant reduction in caries was registered in all age groups. The application with barrel ampoule injection proved to be more economical and practical than the cotton swab application. On the whole Duraphat fluoride varnish reasserted its importance in caries prophylaxis and can be regarded as extremely well suited for individual and collective prevention.

Child↗
PubMed1977

[Animal experimental studies on a new dentin and pulp-protective lacquer (Bayer D-520)].

In an ADA experiment on the protective qualities of a new polyurethane varnish (D-520 Bayer) 72 class 5 cavities were prepared on 3 monkeys and treated by the following 4 methods: -- 18 silicate cement (Bio-Trey) with varnish -- 18 silicate cement (Bio-Trey) without varnish -- 18 composite (Adaptic) fillings with varnish -- 18 composite (Adaptic) fillings without varnish. After an observation time of 14 days, a significant positive result for the 520 varnish could be obtained. An experiment lasting 12 weeks was subsequently undertaken.

Animals↗
PubMed1989

[Adjuvant 5-fluorouracil lacquer administration for reducing the rate of recurrence of condylomata acuminata following laser surgery treatment].

In the recent past we have observed HPV-induced condylomata acuminata with increasing frequency. Providing 60-80% complete remission the laser coagulation is primary in the treatment of condylomata acuminata. However, the generalized mucosal infection with subclinical condylomata acuminata leads to a recurrence in 30-70% of cases. Therefore, we combined laser treatment with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil painting. In a prospective study, 137 patients with a total of 225 treatments were randomly allocated to three groups (laser/laser + 5-FU ointment 5%/Laser + 5-FU 2% painting). After laser treatment only, relapse occurred in 29% of cases, after laser treatment plus 5-fluorouracil 5% ointment in 32%, and after laser treatment and adjuvant 5-fluorouracil 2% painting in only 4%. A topical prophylactic treatment is beneficial because of the multifocal action of HPV. The adjuvant 5-FU painting after laser surgery has been shown to be superior to other treatment modalities with a recurrence rate of only 4%.

Adult↗
PubMed1988

[Caries preventive effectiveness of Fluor Protector and fluoride lacquer, Duraphat under very cariogenic conditions].

Fluoride varnishes Durpahat and Fluor Protector are commonly used and have proven to be effective as caries preventive agents. In the first part of this paper the features of fluoride varnishes in terms of fluoride uptake, caries prevention and toxicological safety are discussed. The effect of both varnishes under high cariogenic conditions is discussed in the second part. In the presented study, 8 patients carried 3 enamel specimens (Fluor Protector, Duraphat, Control) intra-orally during 4 months. They kept plaque accumulation intact on the specimen and avoided fluoride administration from other sources. After 4 months of substantial cariogenic challenge, the enamel was analysed by microradiography and the degree of caries protection obtained for each varnish type was calculated. The results show that under high-risk caries conditions enamel treated with Fluor Protector was significantly better protected (65%) than enamel treated with Duraphat (3%).

Dental Caries↗