In situ clinical evaluation of a stabilised, stannous fluoride dentifrice

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the erosion protection efficacy of a stabilised, stannous fluoride (SnF 2 ) dentifrice versus a sodium fluoride (NaF) dentifrice using a modified in situ clinical model. Methods: This study, a randomised parallel group in situ design with in vivo product use and ex vivo acid challenge, compared: A, a dentifrice containing 1,450 ppm F as NaF; B, a dentifrice containing 1,450 ppm F (1,100 ppm F as SnF 2 + 350 ppm F as NaF); and T, tap water. Sample size was n = 4 per group (total of 12 subjects) and within each subject appliances were placed on each side of the mouth (left and right). Enamel specimens were placed in different positions of the mouth (front, mid-front, mid-rear, rear) in each appliance (total = 8 specimens per subject). Product treatment was twice per day (lingual brushing for 30 seconds followed by swishing for 90 seconds with the resultant product/saliva slurry) in vivo for 15 days, and ex vivo acid treatment (0.02 M citric acid 5 minutes four times per day; total exposure time = 300 minutes). Data were analysed using a general linear repeated measures model with treatment, side and position as fixed effects. Within subjects, correlations were modelled assuming a different correlation and variance for treatment B relative to the other groups. Pairwise treatment differences were performed using a 5% two-sided significance level. Results: Enamel loss (in lm) was significantly lower (P < 0.005) for treatment B versus treatments A and T. Treatment B reduced enamel surface loss by 86.9% relative to treatment A. There was no statistical difference in mean enamel loss (P = 0.51) between treatments A and T. Enamel loss was not statistically different for side (left vs. right; P = 0.44) or position (front, mid-front, mid-rear, rear; P = 0.36). Conclusion: This modified in situ erosion model confirmed the enhanced erosion protection benefits of a stabilised SnF 2 dentifrice versus a conventional NaF dentifrice, validating the ability of the model to safely and effectively demonstrate differences in the erosion protection potential of oral care products.

The Impact of Selected Fluoridated Toothpastes on Dental Erosion in Profilometric Measurement

“…The randomized in situ study comparing the anti-erosive efficacy of Sn-containing sodium fluoride toothpaste with a sodium fluoride and potassium nitrate toothpaste showed the lower enamel loss after use of the stabilised Sn-containing sodium fluoride toothpaste, which was measured by contact profilometry [28]. Also Bellamy et al [29] in contact profilometry readings using modified model in situ confirmed the greater erosion protection benefit of toothpaste with stabilised SnF 2 compared to sodium fluoride toothpaste.…”

“…Recently, Baig et al [24] comparing the ability of NaF and SnF 2 to the inhibition of powdered hydroxyapatite dissolution in buffered acidic solution, found the greater acid resistant of hydroxyapatite after the use of SnF 2 than NaF solutions and similar results after the immersion into slurries of marketed toothpastes containing those chemical compounds. In several studies simulating the oral condition, the efficacy of tin ions against erosion was assessed on enamel specimens coated by salivary pellicle [12,[25][26][27][28][29].…”

The Future of Fluorides and Other Protective Agents in Erosion Prevention

“…Hystad Hove et al [2014] also showed that a tin-containing dentifrice reduced enamel wear in comparison to the negative control group (no fluoridation). Similarly, Bellamy et al [2014] observed that treatment with the tin-containing dentifrice resulted in more than 85% less surface loss than the negative control (no fluoridation). And when comparing the effect of exposure to dentifrice slurry (erosion-only) or slurry together with toothbrushing (erosion-abrasion), Schlueter et al [2013] showed that the tin-containing dentifrice had a significantly better efficacy in both experimental models, resulting in a reduction in enamel loss of more than 50%.…”

Utilização de pastas contendo fosfopeptídeo de caseína-fosfato de cálcio amorfo com e sem fluoreto na prevenção da erosão dentária: uma revisão da literatura

“…Assim sendo, estudos in situ, são utilizados para contornar as dificuldades de realização de estudos de erosão dentária in vivo 53 , oferecendo ainda a vantagem da padronização dos desafios erosivos, como concentração, volume e duração da exposição ao agente erosivo iguais para todos os grupos de estudo, minimizando a variabilidade 54 , somada a exposição dos espécimes ao ambiente bucal. Na maior parte dos estudos in situ já realizados (quadro 01) a aplicação da pasta de CPP-ACP foi feita depois do desafio erosivo.…”