Salivary Fluoride Levels after Use of High‐Fluoride Dentifrice

Vale, Gláuber Campos; Cruz, Priscila Figueiredo; Bohn, Ana Clarissa Cavalcante Elvas; Moura, Marcoeli Silva de

doi:10.1155/2015/302717

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Low chronic salivary flow is one of the strongest salivary risk indicators for developing dental caries [10,[17][18][19]. Oral problems resulting from hypofunction of salivary glands include:…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Buffer Capacity of Saliva as a Function of Time after Consumption of Sugary, Sugar-Free and Probiotic Chewing Gums

Antunes¹,

Marinho²,

Garakis³

et al. 2015

Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine the time required for pH buffering by saliva after use sugary(S), sugar-free (SF) and probiotic (P) chewing gums. Material and Methods: Saliva was collected from 12 volunteer dental students at UNESP São José dos Campos / SP, in order to determine salivary flow (SR) rate and initial buffering capacity (BC). Participants presenting BC>4.0 were invited to continue the research. Participants chewed different types of gum for 3 consecutive days, and saliva was collected at 0-1min, 1-5min, and 5-10min intervals. The time required to neutralize saliva pH after chewing the different types of gum was analyzed by RM ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%). Results: RM ANOVA revealed significant influence on the interaction effect (chewing gum and time) (statisticFdf(4.66) = 4.027, p = 0.0055 <0.05). According to Tukey's test, differences were observed in the following circumstances: for the 0-1 interval, BC of S differs from SF and P; BC of S differs from SF at 1-5 min and 5-10 min intervals; and, 0-1min interval differs from 1-5 min and 5-10 min intervals for both S and SF. Conclusion: Dentistry students showed no increased predisposition to dental caries with a specific type of chewing gum. Although time for pH recovery differed according to gum type, they were all above the critical range for enamel demineralization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Buffer Capacity of Saliva as a Function of Time after Consumption of Sugary, Sugar-Free and Probiotic Chewing Gums

Antunes¹,

Marinho²,

Garakis³

et al. 2015

Pesqui. bras. odontopediatria clín. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…High‐fluoride dentifrice is able to significantly increase intraoral F levels, and it has been used to control caries in root dentine. This substrate is more susceptible to demineralisation than enamel and requires higher concentrations of fluoride to control de‐remineralisation processes .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 Concerning the approaches of fluoride use, fluoridated dentifrice is the most rational, 10 because it associates the mechanical disorganisation of biofilm with the preventive and therapeutic interference of F, 11,12 due tothe maintenance of F levels in biofilm [13][14][15] for up to 10 hours or more after brushing. 14 High-fluoride dentifrice is able to significantly increase intraoral F levels, [16][17][18] and it has been used to control caries in root dentine. This substrate is more susceptible to demineralisation than enamel and requires higher concentrations of fluoride to control de-remineralisation processes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Root dentine demineralisation according to frequency of sucrose exposure using high‐fluoride dentifrice

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate root dentine demineralisation, biomass and loosely bound fluoride (CaF2) concentration according to different frequencies of sucrose exposure using a high‐fluoride dentifrice. Background Although high‐fluoride dentifrice has been recommended to arrest root dentine lesions, it is not clear whether it can protect dentine from increased frequencies of sucrose exposure. Methods An in situ, crossover, split‐mouth study was conducted in 3 phases with 7 days each, in which 10 volunteers used a palatal device containing 4 bovine root dentine slabs (2 on each side) with predetermined initial hardness. Cariogenic challenge consisted in dripping a 20% sucrose solution 0 (control), 2, 4, 6, 8 or 10 times/d in each block. Volunteers used high‐fluoride dentifrice (NaF, 5000 µg F/g) 3 times/d. After each phase, final hardness was measured and the percentage of surface hardness loss (%SHL) calculated. Also, biomass and CaF2 concentration on dentine were determined. The data were processed and analysed by ANOVA and Tukey test with significance level set at 5%. The relationship between the variables was analysed by linear regression and Pearson correlation (r). Results %SHL and biomass were significantly greater than control for sucrose frequencies higher than 6 times/d (P < 0.001), while CaF2 concentration decreased from sucrose frequency higher than 2 times/d (P < 0.001). Regression analysis data showed a significant linear fit between sucrose exposure frequency and the studied variables with a strong correlation (r) for %SHL and CaF2 and moderate for biomass (P < 0.05). Conclusion High‐fluoride dentifrice is able to reduce root dentine demineralisation if sucrose consumption is not higher than 6 times/d.

show abstract

“…(13) Fluoride bioavailability in saliva is used to estimate the anticariogenic potential of fluoridated topical systems, since fluoride diffuses from saliva into the biofilm and its fluid, and acts in remineralization processes at the tooth-biofilm interface. (16) However, the intraoral fluoride retention or substantivity is mainly influenced by userrelated factors, such as age, salivary flow and clearance, behavioral aspects, such as frequency and duration of brushing, amount of toothpaste and other fluoridated products, and post-brushing rinsing pattern. (16,17) Although fluoride absorption into enamel and salivary fluoride retention are the main factors that determine the anticariogenic potential of fluoridated products, little is known about the salivary bioavailability of fluoride after the use of topical agents containing high concentrations of fluoride.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(16) However, the intraoral fluoride retention or substantivity is mainly influenced by userrelated factors, such as age, salivary flow and clearance, behavioral aspects, such as frequency and duration of brushing, amount of toothpaste and other fluoridated products, and post-brushing rinsing pattern. (16,17) Although fluoride absorption into enamel and salivary fluoride retention are the main factors that determine the anticariogenic potential of fluoridated products, little is known about the salivary bioavailability of fluoride after the use of topical agents containing high concentrations of fluoride. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to analyze the amount of fluoride released in saliva after using three different APF systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Fluoride Gel and Foam on Salivary Fluoride Concentration

Seyedakhavan

Sayahpour

Momeni³

et al. 2017

J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ARTICLE INFOBackground and Aim: Many studies have shown that various fluoride-containing products can change salivary fluoride concentration. Nowadays, different kinds of topical fluoride gels and foams are used to prevent dental caries. The aim of this study was to evaluate salivary fluoride concentration following the application of 3 different fluoride containing materials at different follow-up intervals. Materials and Methods: In this cross over clinical trial, 12 dentistry students with the mean age of 25.66±2.4 years participated. They had no dental caries or fluoridecontaining restorations, and they had not received any kind of fluoride treatment ,recently. Each participant was entered in 3 intervention sessions in which Topex®APF gel, Topex APF foam and Cina APF gel were applied followed by a one-week washout period. Before starting the treatment, unstimulated saliva samples were collected. Saliva samples were also collected at 1, 15, 30, and 60 minutes after the treatment, and fluoride concentrations were evaluated by using the ion specific electrode method. Data were analyzed by the use of Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn multiple comparison tests. Results: Salivary concentration was in the maximum range at minute one, after using each type of fluoridated products evaluated in this survey, and it decreased gradually to minute 60. There was a significant statistical difference in fluoride concentration at minutes 1 and 60 after using Topex®APF gel in comparison with Topex®APF foam and Cina APF gel. Furthermore, significant statistical differences in salivary fluoride concentration were reported following the application of Topex® APF gel, Cina APF gel and Topex®APF foam (p<0.001). There were no significant differences between Cina APF gel and Topex®APF foam. Conclusion:The results of the present study revealed that Topex®APF foam at minute one and Cina APF gel at minute 60 induced higher salivary fluoride concentrations in comparison with the other studied fluoride-containing products.

show abstract

Salivary Fluoride Levels after Use of High‐Fluoride Dentifrice

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

Buffer Capacity of Saliva as a Function of Time after Consumption of Sugary, Sugar-Free and Probiotic Chewing Gums

Buffer Capacity of Saliva as a Function of Time after Consumption of Sugary, Sugar-Free and Probiotic Chewing Gums

Root dentine demineralisation according to frequency of sucrose exposure using high‐fluoride dentifrice

Effect of Fluoride Gel and Foam on Salivary Fluoride Concentration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About