PURPOSE: To assess the potential of a stabilised stannous (Sn)-containing NaF dentifrice (Oral B/blend-a-Med(®) Pro-Expert), in addition to a number of other marketed European dentifrices formulated with various fluoride actives and two control dentifrices, to protect enamel against erosive acid damage. METHODS: Cores of human enamel (four per group) were soaked in pooled human saliva, and then treated with a 1:3 slurry (dentifrice:saliva) using a standardised in vitro erosion model (5-day cycling) that includes 10-minute challenges with 1% citric acid applied 60 minutes after each dentifrice treatment. Enamel surface loss was measured using transverse microradiography (TMR). RESULTS: Specimens treated with the Sn-containing NaF dentifrice showed 6.5 μm of surface loss ± 1.2 (SEM), which was not significantly different (P < 0.05, Fisher LSD) from that of a clinically proven, stabilised SnF2 positive control [Crest(®) Pro-Health, 1,100 ppm F as SnF2 : 3.0 μm of surface loss ± 1.1 (SEM)]. The Sn-containing NaF dentifrice and the clinically proven positive control both provided significantly greater protection (P < 0.05, Fisher LSD) compared with all of the other products tested. Enamel loss (SEM) values for other European products and the reference control (active agents) were: Meridol(®) : (1,400 ppm F as AmF + SnF2 ) 12.0 μm (1.47); Colgate(®) Cavity Protection: (1,450 ppm F as SMFP + NaF) 12.9 μm (1.66); Odol med 3(®) (1,400 ppm F as NaF) 14.2 μm (1.49); Elmex(®) (1,400 ppm F as AmF) 14.5 μm (1.76); Colgate(®) Enamel Protect: (1,450 ppm F as NaF + KNO3 ) 16.3 μm (2.02); Lacalut(®) aktiv: (1,400 ppm F as AlF3 ) 18.5 μm (1.71); Sensodyne(®) ProNamel(™) : (1,450 ppm F as NaF + KNO3 ) 20.5 μm (1.26); Crest Cavity Protection (1,100 ppm F as NaF, reference control) 22.00 μm (2.04); and Mentadent(®) : (1,450 ppm F as NaF + Zn citrate) 22.3 μm (0.63). CONCLUSION: These results support the potential for the stabilised, Sn-containing NaF dentifrice to provide erosion protection benefits that are not significantly different from the positive control benchmark for erosion protection (stabilised SnF2 ), and are significantly better than a broad range of dentifrice formulations available on the European market.
PURPOSE: To assess the potential of a stabilised stannous (Sn)-containing NaF dentifrice (Oral B/blend-a-Med(®) Pro-Expert), in addition to a number of other marketed European dentifrices formulated with various fluoride actives and two control dentifrices, to protect enamel against erosive acid damage. METHODS: Cores of human enamel (four per group) were soaked in pooled human saliva, and then treated with a 1:3 slurry (dentifrice:saliva) using a standardised in vitro erosion model (5-day cycling) that includes 10-minute challenges with 1% citric acid applied 60 minutes after each dentifrice treatment. Enamel surface loss was measured using transverse microradiography (TMR). RESULTS: Specimens treated with the Sn-containing NaF dentifrice showed 6.5 μm of surface loss ± 1.2 (SEM), which was not significantly different (P < 0.05, Fisher LSD) from that of a clinically proven, stabilised SnF2 positive control [Crest(®) Pro-Health, 1,100 ppm F as SnF2 : 3.0 μm of surface loss ± 1.1 (SEM)]. The Sn-containing NaF dentifrice and the clinically proven positive control both provided significantly greater protection (P < 0.05, Fisher LSD) compared with all of the other products tested. Enamel loss (SEM) values for other European products and the reference control (active agents) were: Meridol(®) : (1,400 ppm F as AmF + SnF2 ) 12.0 μm (1.47); Colgate(®) Cavity Protection: (1,450 ppm F as SMFP + NaF) 12.9 μm (1.66); Odol med 3(®) (1,400 ppm F as NaF) 14.2 μm (1.49); Elmex(®) (1,400 ppm F as AmF) 14.5 μm (1.76); Colgate(®) Enamel Protect: (1,450 ppm F as NaF + KNO3 ) 16.3 μm (2.02); Lacalut(®) aktiv: (1,400 ppm F as AlF3 ) 18.5 μm (1.71); Sensodyne(®) ProNamel(™) : (1,450 ppm F as NaF + KNO3 ) 20.5 μm (1.26); Crest Cavity Protection (1,100 ppm F as NaF, reference control) 22.00 μm (2.04); and Mentadent(®) : (1,450 ppm F as NaF + Zn citrate) 22.3 μm (0.63). CONCLUSION: These results support the potential for the stabilised, Sn-containing NaF dentifrice to provide erosion protection benefits that are not significantly different from the positive control benchmark for erosion protection (stabilised SnF2 ), and are significantly better than a broad range of dentifrice formulations available on the European market.
Authors: Suru Mankodi; Robert D Bartizek; J Leslie Winston; Aaron R Biesbrock; Stephen F McClanahan; Tao He Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 8.728
Authors: R J Wierichs; H Zelck; C E Doerfer; P Appel; S Paris; M Esteves-Oliveira; H Meyer-Lueckel Journal: Odontology Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 2.634
Authors: Susan Hooper; Joon Seong; Emma Macdonald; Nicholas Claydon; Nicola Hellin; Matthew L Barker; Tao He; Nicola X West Journal: Int Dent J Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 2.607
Authors: Vladimir Yu Reshetnyak; Olga V Nesterova; Oleg I Admakin; Denis A Dobrokhotov; Irina N Avertseva; Samira A Dostdar; Dinara F Khakimova Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 2.757