Premium
A clinical study to measure anti‐erosion properties of a stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice relative to a sodium fluoride/triclosan dentifrice
Author(s) -
West NX,
Seong J,
Hellin N,
Ey H,
Barker ML,
He T
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
international journal of dental hygiene
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.674
H-Index - 38
eISSN - 1601-5037
pISSN - 1601-5029
DOI - 10.1111/idh.12159
Subject(s) - dentifrice , triclosan , medicine , dentistry , enamel paint , sodium fluoride , fluoride , crossover study , oral hygiene , placebo , chemistry , inorganic chemistry , alternative medicine , pathology
Objective To compare the enamel protection efficacy of a stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF 2 ) dentifrice to a sodium fluoride (NaF)/triclosan dentifrice following acidic erosive challenge. Methods In this in situ , randomized, controlled, double‐blind, two‐treatment, four‐period crossover clinical trial, subjects wore an appliance fitted with human enamel samples 6 h day −1 during each 15‐day treatment period. Twice each treatment day they swished with their assigned dentifrice slurry: 0.454% SnF 2 /0.077% NaF or 0.32% NaF/0.3% triclosan. After each treatment and two other times daily, subjects swished with 250 ml of orange juice over a 10‐min period (acidic erosive challenge). Enamel samples were measured for tooth surface loss using contact profilometry at baseline and days 10 and 15. Results Thirty‐six subjects (mean age 44.8 years, range 23–65 years) were randomized to treatment; 33 subjects completed the final study visit. There were no statistically significant baseline differences ( P > 0.44) in the specimen surfaces of the two dentifrice treatment groups via profilometry. At day 10, the SnF 2 dentifrice provided a statistically significant ( P < 0.0001) reduction in enamel loss by 67% versus the NaF/triclosan dentifrice with estimated medians of 1.22 and 3.68 μm, respectively. At day 15, the SnF 2 dentifrice again provided a significantly greater benefit ( P < 0.0001) against tooth surface loss versus the NaF/triclosan dentifrice, with 68% less erosion, and estimated medians of 1.60 and 5.03 μm, respectively. Both dentifrices were well tolerated. Conclusion A stabilized SnF 2 dentifrice provided superior protection against the initiation and progression of tooth enamel surface loss in situ after erosive challenge compared to a NaF/triclosan dentifrice.