Search

Objective: High and low concentration NaF regimes have shown caries protective properties, but the preventive effect against erosive/abrasive wear is unclear. AIM. To measure the inhibiting effect on enamel wear of low and highly concentrated sodium fluoride (NaF) toothpastes and a stannous (SnF2) fluoride gel in a single-blind, randomized in situ study, using a White Light Interferometer., Materials and Methods: Sixteen human molars were each divided into four specimens, mounted on acrylic mouth appliances and worn by eight volunteers for 9 days. Experimental procedures were performed in the laboratory. The enamel specimens were brushed every day with fluoride-free toothpaste. Treatments; group 1: no fluoride treatment (control), group 2: SnF2 gel 2500 ppm F (5 min) every third day, group 3: NaF toothpaste 5000 ppm F 5 min every third day and 2 min the other days, group 4: NaF toothpaste 1450 ppm F (2 min) every day. In order to mimic gastric reflux/vomiting, the specimens were etched with 0.01 M HCl for 2 min twice a day., Results: The mean step height (µm) for the control specimens was -32.9 (SD = 6.8). The mean values for the other groups were -22.2 (SD = 8.4) (group 2), -30.8 (SD = 7.8) (group 3) and -31.4 (SD = 7.7) (group 4). Compared with the control, the SnF2 treated specimens showed significantly lower wear. The NaF toothpastes gave no significant protective effect., Conclusions: Application of SnF2 gel every third day gave protection against erosive-abrasive challenges. Daily application of both low concentration and high concentration NaF toothpaste provided no protection.

Background: Stannous fluoride solutions have shown promising protective effect against erosion/abrasion, but the effect of SnF2 toothpastes is uncertain., Aim: The aim of the study was to test the inhibiting effect of two SnF2 toothpastes and a SnF2 solution against erosive/abrasive wear in a single-blind, randomised in situ study, using a white light interferometer., Methods: Sixteen human molars were each divided into four specimens, mounted on mouth appliances and worn by 8 volunteers for 9 days. Specimens were brushed with toothpaste twice each day for 30 s either with fluoride-free toothpaste or toothpastes including SnF2. Toothpaste was left on the surface for 90 additional seconds. Group 1, fluoride-free toothpaste; Group 2, toothpaste A (0.4% SnF2, Solidox); Group 3, toothpaste B (0.454 % SnF2, Oral-B(®)); Group 4, brushed with fluoride-free toothpaste (30 s) and treated for 2 min with a 0.4 % SnF2 solution (1,000 ppm F). To mimic gastric reflux/vomit, specimens were etched for 2 min twice a day (0.01 M HCl). Procedures were performed extra-orally., Results: The mean enamel wear (in μm) for the control specimens was: -29.2 ± SD 10.5; for group 2 -14.5 SD ± 9.3; for group 3 -33.3 SD ± 7.4, and for group 4 +0.4 SD ± 1.3. The specimens treated with SnF2 solution and toothpaste A showed significantly lower enamel wear than the control group. Toothpaste B gave no significant reduction in enamel wear., Conclusions: The SnF2 solution fully protected the enamel surface against erosive and abrasive challenges. The SnF2 toothpaste A (Solidox) showed less, but significant protection of the enamel, while no statistically significant protection was demonstrated by SnF2 toothpaste B (Oral-B(®) Pro-Expert).

The aim of this in situ study was to compare the protective effect of TiF4, SnF2 and NaF on the development of erosion-like lesions in human enamel. Fourteen human molars were each divided into 4 specimens, mounted on acrylic mouth appliances and worn by 7 volunteers for 9 days. In order to mimic a feasible treatment procedure for patients with voluntary or involuntary gastric reflux, the specimens were etched for 2 min twice a day (0.01 M HCl) and fluoride applications were performed every third day (2 min). The controls were treated as the other specimens except for the fluoride applications. Etch depths and surface roughness changes (R(q)) were measured by white light interferometry. Compared with the control, TiF4 and SnF2 reduced the etching depth by 100% (p < 0.001) and 91% (p < 0.001), respectively, and both treatments resulted in an observable surface layer. NaF had no significant protective effect (p = 0.46). It can be concluded that although SnF2 provided significant protection for the enamel surfaces, TiF4 showed the best protection against acid attack, while NaF had no significant protective effect in this study.

The aim of this in vitro study was to examine the effect of fluoride treatment on pellicle-covered enamel exposed to an acidic challenge simulating gastric reflux. Sixteen bovine and 16 human teeth were sectioned into four pieces, divided into four groups: (1) control, (2) 2-hour pellicle, (3) TiF(4), and (4) 2-hour pellicle + TiF(4), and subsequently subjected to 3 ml 0.01 M HCl stepwise for 4 + 4 + 4 min. The acid was analysed for calcium by atomic absorption spectroscopy. TiF(4) reduced Ca release from enamel by 76, 57 and 56% following the 4 + 4 + 4-min acid exposures, respectively, in bovine and 44, 54 and 54% in human enamel. These results suggest that treatment of enamel with a TiF(4) solution, with or without pellicle removal, may provide protection for the enamel against acid attack.