We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
International Journal of Esthetic Dentistry  (English Edition)



Forgotten password?


Dear readers,

our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.

Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Esthet Dent 15 (2020), No. 3     11. Aug. 2020
Int J Esthet Dent 15 (2020), No. 3  (11.08.2020)

Page 306-316, PubMed:32760925

Clinical evaluation of the immediate masking effect of enamel white spot lesions treated with an infiltrant resin
Andrade, Rosa Maria Pereira Moises Barbosa / Lima, Tayllan Oliveira / Menezes-Oliveira, Maria Angelica / Nogueira, Ruchele / Lepri, Cesar Penazzo / Geraldo-Martins, Vinicius
The aim of this study was to evaluate, in vivo, the immediate masking effect of white spot lesions (WSLs) treated with an infiltrant resin (IR). The investigation was conducted on 40 young adolescent and adult patients (11 to 23 years old) who presented with at least one permanent maxillary or mandibular anterior tooth with active WSLs on the enamel (ICDAS score 2). Before resin infiltration, the color of both the WSLs and the sound adjacent enamel (SAE) was evaluated by a digital spectrophotometer (CIELab). Subsequently, a resin infiltration technique (Icon) was performed on the WSLs according to the manufacturer's instruction. At the end of the clinical session, the color of the IR was evaluated. The color difference (ΔE) was calculated between WSL × SAE, WSL × IR, and IR × SAE, and then analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Tukey's test. The L*, a*, and b* values of WSL, SAE, and IR were compared using the Student's t test for related samples (α = 5%). The ΔE observed was 5.93 ± 0.41 on the WSL × IR comparison, and 5.77 ± 0.41 on the IR × S AE one, indicating that the color of the WSL changed after treatment, but that the infiltration did not fully camouflage the WSLs when compared with the SAE. The lightness was higher for the SAE than for the IR. It was concluded that the IR treatment was not able to camouflage the color of the WSLs when compared with the SAE. However, the treatment was able to attenuate the discoloration of the demineralized dental enamel.
fulltext (no access granted) Endnote-Export