We have located links that may give you full text access.
Efficacy of toothpastes in the prevention of erosive tooth wear in permanent and deciduous teeth.
Clinical Oral Investigations 2018 May 3
AIM: To evaluate the erosive preventive effect of toothpastes in permanent (PT) and deciduous teeth (dt).
DESIGN: Enamel samples were divided into five groups (n = 20): G1: placebo toothpaste; G2: NaF toothpaste; G3: AmF-NaF-SnCl2 anti-erosion toothpaste; G4: SnF2- toothpaste; and G5: NaF anti-erosion toothpaste for children. The samples were exposed to five erosion-abrasion cycles (artificial saliva incubation; 3 min in 1% citric acid; 2 min in slurry, toothbrush abrasion, 50 strokes, 200 g). Surface microhardness (SMH), surface specular reflection intensity (SRI), and cumulative surface loss (CSL) were measured. Comparisons among toothpastes were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis tests and comparisons between PT and dt were evaluated using Wilcoxon's rank sum test.
RESULTS: G1 exhibited significantly lower SMH values in PT than the other toothpastes (p < 0.05), with no significant differences among the others groups. In dt, G1 and G4 exhibited significantly different values than the other groups (p < 0.05). G4 exhibited lower values of SRI in both types of teeth. Deciduous teeth presented significantly higher SRI than PT (p < 0.05), except for G3. Deciduous teeth generally presented higher CSL than PT, except for G3.
CONCLUSIONS: Deciduous teeth were more prone to mineral loss than permanent teeth. G5 exhibited better efficacy for both teeth, while G3 exhibited a better preventive effect only for deciduous teeth.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Erosive tooth wear prevalence in children is growing and deciduous teeth are more susceptible than permanent teeth. Considering this, it is important to know the preventive effect of different toothpastes in an initial erosion-abrasion model.
DESIGN: Enamel samples were divided into five groups (n = 20): G1: placebo toothpaste; G2: NaF toothpaste; G3: AmF-NaF-SnCl2 anti-erosion toothpaste; G4: SnF2- toothpaste; and G5: NaF anti-erosion toothpaste for children. The samples were exposed to five erosion-abrasion cycles (artificial saliva incubation; 3 min in 1% citric acid; 2 min in slurry, toothbrush abrasion, 50 strokes, 200 g). Surface microhardness (SMH), surface specular reflection intensity (SRI), and cumulative surface loss (CSL) were measured. Comparisons among toothpastes were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis tests and comparisons between PT and dt were evaluated using Wilcoxon's rank sum test.
RESULTS: G1 exhibited significantly lower SMH values in PT than the other toothpastes (p < 0.05), with no significant differences among the others groups. In dt, G1 and G4 exhibited significantly different values than the other groups (p < 0.05). G4 exhibited lower values of SRI in both types of teeth. Deciduous teeth presented significantly higher SRI than PT (p < 0.05), except for G3. Deciduous teeth generally presented higher CSL than PT, except for G3.
CONCLUSIONS: Deciduous teeth were more prone to mineral loss than permanent teeth. G5 exhibited better efficacy for both teeth, while G3 exhibited a better preventive effect only for deciduous teeth.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Erosive tooth wear prevalence in children is growing and deciduous teeth are more susceptible than permanent teeth. Considering this, it is important to know the preventive effect of different toothpastes in an initial erosion-abrasion model.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app