2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2014.01.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of S-PRG eluate on oral biofilm and oral malodor

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
32
3
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
2
32
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although all toothpaste formulations with active ingredients (fluoride or S‐PRG filler) significantly inhibited tooth demineralization relative to the untreated control, toothpaste containing S‐PRG filler rendered a higher percentage reduction of demineralization (Table ). These findings were consistent with those of previous studies that demonstrated that S‐PRG filler‐containing materials reduced biofilm formation and inhibited enamel demineralization . Although the toothpaste containing S‐PRG filler offered greater protection against demineralization relative to NaMFP‐containing toothpaste, only the formulations with S‐PRG filler 5% and 20% achieved the set effectiveness criterion of at least 20% statistically‐significant higher ∆z inhibition than the NaMFP toothpaste (only S‐PRG filler 20% with LD).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although all toothpaste formulations with active ingredients (fluoride or S‐PRG filler) significantly inhibited tooth demineralization relative to the untreated control, toothpaste containing S‐PRG filler rendered a higher percentage reduction of demineralization (Table ). These findings were consistent with those of previous studies that demonstrated that S‐PRG filler‐containing materials reduced biofilm formation and inhibited enamel demineralization . Although the toothpaste containing S‐PRG filler offered greater protection against demineralization relative to NaMFP‐containing toothpaste, only the formulations with S‐PRG filler 5% and 20% achieved the set effectiveness criterion of at least 20% statistically‐significant higher ∆z inhibition than the NaMFP toothpaste (only S‐PRG filler 20% with LD).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Sr 2+ released from S‐PRG fillers might also enhance the acid resistance of teeth by converting hydroxyapatite to strontiumapatite . The teeth in the present study were exposed to S‐PRG filler in the presence of plaque biofilm, and ions released by S‐PRG fillers have been shown to reduce the adherence of Streptococcus mutans used in the present study, and higher concentrations of S‐PRG filler are necessary to fully disrupt mature biofilms compared with those necessary to inhibit biofilm formation …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The S-PRG fillers are prepared by the initiation of an acid-base reaction between fluoroboroaluminosilicate glass and aqueous polyacrylic acid. These bioactive S-PRG particles are thought to promote remineralization [13] and induce antibacterial effects [14,15] through the release of multiple ions such as fluoride, strontium, sodium, boron, aluminum and silicon [16,17]. The aim of this study was to evaluate selected antibacterial, physiochemical and bonding properties of a prototype S-PRG filler-based root repair cement in comparison to commercially available materials used as root repair cements, namely MTA and IRM.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, S-PRG fillers release several types of ions (e.g., fluoride, boron, silicate, aluminum, sodium, and strontium) 4) . The release of such ions prevents bacterial adhesion 5) , suppresses biofilm formation 6,7) , prevents demineralization 8,9) , and enhances remineralization 10,11) . Like calcium (Ca), strontium (Sr) is an alkaline earth element and has similar physicochemical properties.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%