Influence of Toothbrushing on the Antierosive Effect of Film-Forming Agents

Autor:	Frank Lippert, George J. Eckert, Anderson T. Hara, Samira Helena João-Souza, Idalina Vieira Aoki, Taís Scaramucci
Rok vydání:	2016
Předmět:	Toothbrushing 0301 basic medicine business.product_category Sodium Negative control chemistry.chemical_element Dentistry In Vitro Techniques Phosphates 03 medical and health sciences chemistry.chemical_compound 0302 clinical medicine Sodium fluoride Dentin medicine Animals Humans Tooth Erosion Dental Enamel Saliva General Dentistry Toothpaste Enamel paint business.industry Tin Compounds Drug Synergism 030206 dentistry Cariostatic Agents Surface loss body regions Tooth Abrasion 030104 developmental biology medicine.anatomical_structure chemistry Tooth Remineralization visual_art visual_art.visual_art_medium Sodium Fluoride Cattle business Fluoride Nuclear chemistry
Zdroj:	Caries Research. 50:104-110
ISSN:	1421-976X 0008-6568
Popis:	This study evaluated the influence of toothbrushing on the antierosive effect of solutions containing sodium fluoride (225 ppm/F), stannous chloride (800 ppm/Sn), sodium linear polyphosphate (2%/LPP), and their combinations, and deionized water as negative control (C). Solutions were tested in a 5-day erosion-remineralization-abrasion cycling model, using enamel and dentin specimens (n = 8). Erosion was performed 6 times/day for 5 min, exposure to the test solutions 3 times/day for 2min, and toothbrushing (or not) with toothpaste slurry 2 times/day for 2 min (45 strokes). Surface loss (SL) was determined by noncontact profilometry. Data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Brushing caused more SL than no brushing for enamel (mean ± SD, in micrometers: 52.7 ± 6.6 and 33.0 ± 4.5, respectively), but not for dentin (28.2 ± 1.9 and 26.6 ± 1.8, respectively). For enamel without brushing, F+LPP+Sn showed the lowest SL (23.8 ± 3.4), followed by F+Sn (30.6 ± 4.9) and F+LPP (31.7 ± 1.7), which did not differ from each other. No differences were found between the other groups and C (37.8 ± 2.1). When brushing, F+LPP+Sn exhibited the lowest SL (36.7 ± 2.4), not differing from F+LPP (39.1 ± 1.8). F, F+Sn and LPP+Sn were similar (46.7 ± 2.9, 42.1 ± 2.8 and 45.3 ± 4.6, respectively) and better than C (52.7 ± 4.3). Sn (55.0 ± 2.4) and LPP (51.0 ± 4.3) did not differ from C. For dentin, neither groups differed from C, regardless of brushing. In conclusion, toothbrushing did not affect the antierosive effect of F+Sn, F+LPP and F+LPP+Sn on enamel, although overall it led to more erosion than nonbrushing. F and LPP+Sn showed a protective effect only under brushing conditions, whereas Sn and LPP did not exhibit any protection. For dentin, neither toothbrushing nor the test solutions influenced the development of erosion.
Databáze:	OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:	https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::53ae02cd214658da16c78a81583de413 https://doi.org/10.1159/000443619 Zobrazit plný text záznamu Plný text ve formátu PDF Plný text ve formátu HTML
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje	K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit.