RESUMEN
This study evaluated the combined effect of Nd:YAG laser irradiation and fluoridated gels containing photo absorbers against enamel erosion. Enamel specimens from bovine teeth were polished, eroded (10 min, with 1% citric acid, pH = 2.6), and randomly allocated into the experimental groups (n = 8), according to the different surface treatments: fluoridated gels (F: 9047 ppm F and F + Sn: 9047 ppm F and 3000 ppm Sn), with or without photo absorbers (E: erythrosine and MB: methylene blue), and associated or not with Nd:YAG laser irradiation (in contact; 0.5 W; 50 mJ; ~41.66 J/cm2; 10 Hz; 40 s; pulse duration of 120 µs). A placebo gel (PLA) associated or not with laser was used as control. All gels had pH = 4.5 and were applied for 2 min. Laser irradiation was performed during gel application. The specimens were then submitted to a 5-day erosion-remineralization cycling model using 0.3% citric acid (pH = 2.6), 4×/day. Enamel surface loss (SL) was analyzed by optical profilometry in the end of the cycling (in µm). Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey tests (α = 0.05). Means (SD) of SL for the groups were the following (different superscript letters imply significant difference among groups): PLA (21.02 ± 1.28)a, PLA + laser (19.20 ± 0.96)ab, laser (17.47 ± 1.50)b, F + Sn + E + laser (13.69 ± 0.62)c, F + E + laser (13.52 ± 1.16)c, F (13.10 ± 1.08)c, F + laser (11.94 ± 1.44)cd, F + Sn + MB + laser (11.90 ± 4.02)cd, F + MB + laser (11.42 ± 1.42)cd, F + Sn (11.12 ± 1.20)cd, and F + Sn + laser (10.35 ± 0.89)d. In conclusion, all fluoridated gels and the Nd:YAG laser irradiation reduced erosion development, but the combination of treatments did not promote further protection. The addition of photo absorbers to the fluoridated gels did not influence the anti-erosive effect of the combination of laser plus fluoridated gels.