| Literature DB >> 31312219 |
Frank Mayta-Tovalino1,2,3, Eloy Gamboa1,2, Richard Sánchez1,3, Jorge Rios1, Ramín Medina4, Martín García4, Jhonn Asencios4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop and formulate a new experimental dentifrice with and without fluoride based on the peel and the fruit of the Passiflora mollissima (tumbo) and also to evaluate its antimicrobial activity against seven bacterial strains.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31312219 PMCID: PMC6595319 DOI: 10.1155/2019/9056590
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Dent ISSN: 1687-8728
Chemical components of experimental dentifrice based on Passiflora mollisima “tumbo.”
| Components | Properties | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Precipitated calcium carbonate | Abrasive |
| 2 | Tetrasodium pyrophosphate | Additives |
| 3 | AEROSIL (hydrophilic pyrogenic silica) | Additives |
| 4 | Colloidal silicon dioxide USP | Preservative |
| 5 | NIPAGIN (methylparaben sodium) or methyl parahydroxybenzoate | Sweetener |
| 6 | Saccharin sodium, powder or crystallized | Flavoring agent |
| 7 | Menthol mint aroma crystals | Moisturizers are added slowly to homogenize the preparation |
| 8 | Deionized, demineralized, or distilled water | Moisturizers are added slowly to homogenize the preparation |
| 9 | Glycerin (or glycerol) | Binder |
| 10 | Xanthan gum | Whiteness to dentifrices |
| 11 | Titanium dioxide (dye) | Surfactants |
| 12 | Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLE) | 1450 ppm fluorine |
| 13 | Sodium fluoride (fluoride) | Moisturizers |
| 14 | Diluted methanol extract (10 g in 10 mL of distilled water) | Flavoring agent |
Comparison of the antimicrobial activity of tumbo dentifrice against seven strains of the oral cavity (formulation without fluoride).
| Microorganisms | Part of the plant | Evaluation time (hours) | Mean ± SD | Min | Max |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Pulp | 24 | 20.0 ± 2.1 | 17.8 | 25.2 | 0.093 |
| 48 | 19.3 ± 1.1 | 17.6 | 21.1 | 0.479 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 16.0 ± 1.5 | 14.6 | 18.6 | 0.008 | |
| 48 | 15.5 ± 1.5 | 13.8 | 18.0 | 0.061 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 15.5 ± 1.1 | 13.8 | 17.3 | 0.492 |
| 48 | 15.2 ± 1.2 | 13.0 | 17.0 | 0.999 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 15.5 ± 0.4 | 15.0 | 16.5 | 0.647 | |
| 48 | 15 ± 0.4 | 14.3 | 15.8 | 0.988 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 18.3 ± 1 | 17.3 | 20.2 | 0.012 |
| 48 | 23.6 ± 4.4 | 17.0 | 29.0 | 0.078 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 18.7 ± 3.3 | 16.3 | 29.1 |
| |
| 48 | 18.6 ± 3.3 | 16.3 | 29.1 |
| ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 20.8 ± 0.6 | 19.8 | 22.1 | 0.623 |
| 48 | 20.2 ± 0.7 | 18.9 | 21.5 | 0.491 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 17.6 ± 0.2 | 17.2 | 18.1 | 0.842 | |
| 48 | 17.1 ± 0.2 | 16.8 | 17.6 | 0.511 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 15.5 ± 0.9 | 13.8 | 17.1 | 0.730 |
| 48 | 24.7 ± 1.3 | 23.0 | 27.2 | 0.540 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 19.3 ± 1.7 | 16.2 | 22.3 | 0.534 | |
| 48 | 18.8 ± 1.8 | 16.0 | 22.1 | 0.274 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 14.9 ± 0.1 | 14.7 | 15.3 | 0.331 |
| 48 | 14.1 ± 0.5 | 12.9 | 14.9 | 0.555 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 15.9 ± 0.4 | 15.3 | 16.6 | 0.447 | |
| 48 | 15.1 ± 0.5 | 14.2 | 16.0 | 0.406 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 14.5 ± 0.9 | 13.6 | 16.4 | 0.016 |
| 48 | 14.1 ± 0.9 | 13.0 | 16.2 | 0.195 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 16.5 ± 0.4 | 15.6 | 17.3 | 0.699 | |
| 48 | 15.7 ± 0.6 | 14.8 | 16.8 | 0.941 | ||
All measurements were made in mm. Shapiro–Wilk test.
Comparison of the antimicrobial activity of tumbo dentifrice against seven strains of the oral cavity (formulation with fluoride).
| Microorganisms | Part of the plant | Evaluation time (hours) | Mean ± SD | Min | Max |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Pulp | 24 | 21.0 ± 1.8 | 19.2 | 25.6 | 0.029 |
| 48 | 19.8 ± 1.4 | 17.9 | 22.3 | 0.178 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 14.9 ± 0.4 | 13.8 | 15.5 | 0.070 | |
| 48 | 14.5 ± 0.4 | 13.5 | 15.2 | 0.178 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 16.3 ± 3.9 | 12.9 | 25.3 |
|
| 48 | 13.8 ± 1.4 | 11.3 | 15.8 | 0.442 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 14.3 ± 0.3 | 13.8 | 14.9 | 0.205 | |
| 48 | 13.9 ± 0.5 | 12.8 | 14.8 | 0.754 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 19.0 ± 0.8 | 17.8 | 20.2 | 0.838 |
| 48 | 22.1 ± 1.3 | 19.9 | 24.6 | 0.717 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 18.9 ± 3.2 | 17.2 | 29.2 |
| |
| 48 | 18.9 ± 3.2 | 17.2 | 29.2 |
| ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 21.0 ± 0.3 | 20.6 | 21.9 | 0.268 |
| 48 | 20.3 ± 0.5 | 19.6 | 21.2 | 0.795 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 18.1 ± 0.4 | 17.5 | 18.9 | 0.704 | |
| 48 | 17.5 ± 0.4 | 16.8 | 18.2 | 0.765 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 17.4 ± 1.4 | 15.7 | 19.7 | 0.155 |
| 48 | 21.2 ± 1.9 | 17.0 | 23.6 | 0.180 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 21.1 ± 0.9 | 20.2 | 22.6 | 0.064 | |
| 48 | 19.4 ± 3.1 | 9.8 | 22.0 |
| ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 15.3 ± 0.3 | 15.0 | 16.0 | 0.205 |
| 48 | 14.0 ± 0.3 | 13.7 | 14.9 | 0.057 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 15.5 ± 0.5 | 14.9 | 16.5 | 0.084 | |
| 48 | 14.8 ± 0.5 | 14.0 | 16.2 | 0.126 | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| Pulp | 24 | 14.4 ± 0.4 | 13.6 | 15.0 | 0.625 |
| 48 | 14.3 ± 0.7 | 12.9 | 15.5 | 0.932 | ||
| Peel | 24 | 17.0 ± 0.4 | 16.5 | 17.7 | 0.165 | |
| 48 | 16.4 ± 0.5 | 15.6 | 17.0 | 0.029 | ||
All measurements were made in mm. Shapiro–Wilk test.
Comparison of the antimicrobial activity of tumbo dentifrice against different commercial toothpastes.
| Microorganisms | Groups | Mean ± SD | Min | Max |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Pulp | 20.0 ± 2.1 | 17.8 | 25.2 | 0.093 | 0.651++ |
|
| Peel | 16.0 ± 1.5 | 14.6 | 18.6 | 0.008 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 17.0 ± 0.6 | 16.2 | 17.8 | 0.734 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 16.9 ± 0.8 | 16.1 | 17.8 | 0.386 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 15.1 ± 0.2 | 14.9 | 15.5 | 0.392 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 11.2 ± 0.8 | 10.0 | 12.0 | 0.191 | |||
| Parodontax® | 30.2 ± 1.5 | 28.9 | 32.5 | 0.194 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 15.5 ± 1.1 | 13.8 | 17.3 | 0.492 | 0.906+ |
|
| Peel | 15.5 ± 0.4 | 15.0 | 16.5 | 0.647 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 12.8 ± 0.4 | 12.3 | 13.2 | 0.303 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 13.9 ± 0.8 | 12.9 | 14.9 | 0.900 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 14.2 ± 0.6 | 13.5 | 14.9 | 0.513 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 10.6 ± 0.3 | 10.2 | 11.0 | 0.408 | |||
| Parodontax® | 15.7 ± 0.2 | 15.5 | 16.1 | 0.649 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 18.3 ± 1 | 17.3 | 20.2 | 0.012 | 0.143++ |
|
| Peel | 18.7 ± 3.3 | 16.3 | 29.1 | 0.000 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 14.1 ± 0.4 | 13.8 | 14.7 | 0.303 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 15 ± 0.1 | 14.8 | 15.2 | 0.714 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 13.4 ± 0.1 | 13.2 | 13.6 | 0.000 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 13.2 ± 0.2 | 12.9 | 13.5 | 0.000 | |||
| Parodontax® | 14.1 ± 0.5 | 13.5 | 14.9 | 0.889 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 20.8 ± 0.6 | 19.8 | 22.1 | 0.623 |
|
|
| Peel | 17.6 ± 0.2 | 17.2 | 18.1 | 0.842 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 17.7 ± 0.6 | 17.0 | 18.3 | 0.443 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 21.2 ± 0.9 | 20.1 | 22.3 | 0.997 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 22.1 ± 0.8 | 20.9 | 23.0 | 0.696 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 15.5 ± 2.8 | 12.9 | 18.3 | 0.126 | |||
| Parodontax® | 15.2 ± 0.2 | 14.9 | 15.5 | 0.910 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 17.4 ± 1.4 | 15.7 | 19.7 | 0.730 |
|
|
| Peel | 21.1 ± 0.9 | 20.2 | 22.6 | 0.534 |
| ||
| Dento Herbal® | 17.9 ± 0.6 | 17.3 | 18.7 | 0.513 | |||
| Colgate Herbal® | 21.7 ± 0.4 | 21.2 | 22.3 | 0.970 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 20.9 ± 1.5 | 19.9 | 23.2 | 0.025 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | |||
| Parodontax® | 24.4 ± 0.6 | 23.8 | 25.0 | 0.111 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 14.9 ± 0.1 | 14.7 | 15.3 | 0.331 | 1.000+ |
|
| Peel | 15.9 ± 0.4 | 15.3 | 16.6 | 0.447 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 19.7 ± 0.5 | 19.0 | 20.2 | 0.369 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 21.1 ± 0.5 | 20.4 | 21.8 | 0.994 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 20.4 ± 1.1 | 19.6 | 22.1 | 0.211 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | |||
| Parodontax® | 26.1 ± 0.5 | 25.6 | 26.9 | 0.680 | |||
|
| |||||||
|
| Pulp | 14.5 ± 0.9 | 13.6 | 16.4 | 0.016 | 0.425++ |
|
| Peel | 16.5 ± 0.4 | 15.6 | 17.3 | 0.699 | |||
| Dento Herbal® | 16 ± 0.6 | 15.2 | 16.8 | 0.999 |
| ||
| Colgate Herbal® | 15.6 ± 0.5 | 15.1 | 16.3 | 0.688 | |||
| Kolynos Herbal® | 19.9 ± 0.1 | 19.8 | 20.2 | 0.849 | |||
| Sensodyne® | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | |||
| Parodontax® | 17.7 ± 0.4 | 17.2 | 18.2 | 0.420 | |||
All measurements were made in mm. The concentrations were calculated from the dilutions of the active ingredient; the Sensodyne control group was excluded from any statistical analysis because the antimicrobial activity was not present. Shapiro–Wilk test. +Student t-test. ++Mann–Whitney U test. ANOVA test. †Kruskal–Wallis test. Level of significance p < 0.05.