Effects of pH and fluoride concentration of dentifrices on fluoride levels in saliva, biofilm, and biofilm fluid in vivo

Salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with experimental toothpaste containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler

BACKGROUND

Single-blind 9 case comparative studies were conducted to evaluate salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing using experimental toothpaste containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) fillers. Preliminary tests were conducted in order to determine the volume of usage as well as the concentrations (wt %) of S-PRG filler. Based on the results given these experiments, we compared the salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with 0.5 g of 4 different types of toothpastes: 5 wt % S-PRG filler, 1400 ppm F AmF (amine fluoride), 1500 ppm F NaF (sodium fluoride), and MFP (monofluorophosphate) containing toothpaste.

METHODS

Of the 12 participants, 7 participated in the preliminary study and 8 in the main study. All participants brushed their teeth using the scrubbing method for 2 min. At first, 1.0 and 0.5 g of 20 wt % S-PRG filler toothpastes were used to compare, then followed by 0.5 g of 0 (control), 1, and 5 wt % S-PRG toothpastes, respectively. The participants spat out once and rinsed with 15 mL of distilled water for 5 s. Saliva was collected for 3 min each at different time intervals of 0 (baseline), 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, and 180 min after the rinsing. Fluoride concentrations were determined using a fluoride electrode, and the area under the salivary clearance - time curve (AUC: ppm‧min) of each toothpaste was calculated as the salivary fluoride retention. The main study was then conducted to evaluate the salivary fluoride concentrations as well as the AUC value using 0.5 g of 5 wt % S-PRG filler toothpaste, followed by NaF, MFP, and AmF toothpastes.

RESULTS

Since there were no statistical differences between using 1.0 and 0.5 g of 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes in salivary fluoride concentrations as well as the AUC value throughout the 180 min measurement, the volume was set as 0.5 g for the following studies. Concentrations of 5 and 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes retained 0.09 ppm F or more in saliva even after 180 min. No statistical differences were seen in the salivary fluoride concentrations at any time intervals as well as the AUC value between 5 and 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes. Based on these results, the concentration of 5 wt % S-PRG toothpaste was used for the main comparative study. MFP toothpaste resulted in by far the lowest salivary fluoride concentrations (0.06 ppm F at 180 min) and the AUC value (24.6 ppm‧min), whereas 5 wt % S-PRG toothpaste (0.15 ppm F at 180 min, 92.3 ppm‧min) displayed retention on par with AmF toothpaste which appeared to result in higher values (0.17 ppm F at 180 min, 103 ppm‧min), compared to NaF toothpaste (0.12 ppm F at 180 min, 49.3 ppm‧min).

CONCLUSIONS

The salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with 0.5 g of 5 wt % S-PRG filler containing toothpaste showed retention similar to the best performing 1400 ppm F AmF toothpaste even 180 min after toothbrushing.

Effect of dentifrices with different pH and fluoride concentrations on fluoride levels in biofilm and nails: an RCT

PURPOSE

to evaluate the effect of dentifrice pH and fluoride concentration ([F]) on fluoride uptake on the biofilm and nails of children from a non-fluoridated area.

METHODS

two hundred and twenty-eight two- to four-year-old children were randomly allocated into 3 groups according to the type of dentifrice: G1: 1100 μg F/g, pH 4.5 (n = 76); G2: 750 μg F/g, pH 4.5 (n = 74); and G3: 1100 μg F/g, pH 7.0 (n = 78). Nails were collected at 4, 8, and 12 months after starting dentifrice use and biofilm was collected 5 and 60 minutes after toothbrushing. The concentrations of F in nails and biofilm were analyzed by HMDS facilitated diffusion. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis/Mann-Whitney's test and the comparison between biofilm collection times was done using Wilcoxon test (p £ 0.05).

RESULTS

a significant reduction of [F] in biofilm was observed 60 minutes after toothbrushing, regardless of the dentifrice used. However, 5 minutes after toothbrushing, G1 had a significantly higher [F] compared to G2 and G3, and 60 minutes after toothbrushing, [F] was significantly higher for G1 and G2 compared to G3. G1 and G3 had significantly higher [F] in the nails compared to G2.

CONCLUSION

a lower dentifrice concentration is a relevant factor for the reduction of excessive fluoride intake. The use of a low-F acidified dentifrice combines the reduction of fluoride uptake with caries prevention by leading to greater incorporation of F into the biofilm over time.

The influence of biofilm maturation on fluoride's anticaries efficacy

OBJECTIVES

(1) To explore the influence of biofilm maturation and timing of exposure on fluoride anticaries efficacy and (2) to explore biofilm recovery post-treatment.

METHODS

Bovine enamel specimens were utilized in a pH cycling model (28 subgroups [n = 18]). Each subgroup received different treatments [exposure]: sodium fluoride [NaF]; stannous fluoride [SnF₂]; amine fluoride [AmF]; and de-ionized water [DIW], at a specific period: early: days 1-4; middle: days 3-6; and late: days 7-10. During non-exposure periods, pH cycling included DIW instead of fluorides. Objective 1: part 1 (cycling for 4, 6, or 10 days). Part 2 (cycling for 10 days). Objective 2: early exposure: three sample collection time points (immediate, 3 days, and 6 days post-treatment); middle exposure: two sample collection time points (immediate, 4 days post-treatment). The enamel and biofilm were analyzed ([surface microhardness; mineral loss; lesion depth]; [lactate dehydrogenase enzyme activity; exopolysaccharide amount; viability]). Data were analyzed using ANOVA (p = 0.05).

RESULTS

Objective 1: Early exposure to fluorides produced protective effects against lesion progression in surface microhardness and mineral loss, but not for lesion depth. Objective 2: Early exposure slowed the demineralization process. SnF₂ and AmF were superior to NaF in reducing LDH and EPS values, regardless of exposure time. They also prevented biofilm recovery.

CONCLUSION

Earlier exposure to SnF₂ and AmF may result in less tolerant biofilm. Early fluoride treatment may produce a protective effect against demineralization. SnF₂ and AmF may be the choice to treat older biofilm and prevent biofilm recovery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The study provides an understanding of biofilm-fluoride interaction with mature biofilm (e.g., hard-to-reach areas, orthodontic patients) and fluoride's sustainable effect hours/days after brushing.

Randomised study of intra-oral kinetics of fluoride-containing toothpastes

OBJECTIVES

This randomised, controlled, analyst blind, crossover study aimed to evaluate and compare salivary fluoride and calcium ion concentration over 60 min following brushing with an assigned treatment and following an orange juice (OJ) or deionised (DI) water rinse 60 min post-brushing.

METHODS

Study treatments, both containing 1150 ppm fluoride as NaF and 5% w/w KNO₃, were the Test (including 1.2 % w/w cocamidopropyl betaine) and Comparator (including tetrasodium pyrophosphate and sodium lauryl sulphate) toothpastes. Twenty nine participants were randomised to treatment.

RESULTS

A sharp increase in salivary fluoride ion concentration immediately post-brushing with either toothpaste decreased over time. Fluoride concentration following Test toothpaste use was numerically higher than the Comparator at all timepoints, with a significant difference from 10 min post-brushing (p < .05). Following the 60 min rinse, there were no significant differences between the Test or Comparator + OJ groups in salivary fluoride concentration but the Test + DI water group was significantly lower than Test (p < .001) or Comparator (p < .001) + OJ groups. A reduction in salivary calcium ion concentration was seen immediately post-brushing and after the OJ rinse with both toothpastes. Significant differences were observed in favour of the Test toothpaste at all timepoints (p < .05) and for Test and Comparator + OJ group (p < .001) compared with Test + DI water rinse. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that toothpaste formulations with identical declared fluoride concentrations and the same fluoride source give rise to differing intraoral fluoride concentrations over time, which are potentially related to different formulation excipient effects.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

By understanding the interaction of toothpaste formulation excipients in the oral environment, formulations can be developed that maximise retention of fluoride in the oral environment.

Influence of salivary conditioning and sucrose concentration on biofilm-mediated enamel demineralization

INTRODUCTION

The acquired pellicle formation is the first step in dental biofilm formation. It distinguishes dental biofilms from other biofilm types.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the influence of salivary pellicle formation before biofilm formation on enamel demineralization.

METHODOLOGY

Saliva collection was approved by Indiana University IRB. Three donors provided wax-stimulated saliva as the microcosm bacterial inoculum source. Acquired pellicle was formed on bovine enamel samples. Two groups (0.5% and 1% sucrose-supplemented growth media) with three subgroups (surface conditioning using filtered/pasteurized saliva; filtered saliva; and deionized water (DIW)) were included (n=9/subgroup). Biofilm was then allowed to grow for 48 h using Brain Heart Infusion media supplemented with 5 g/l yeast extract, 1 mM CaCl2.2H2O, 5% vitamin K and hemin (v/v), and sucrose. Enamel samples were analyzed for Vickers surface microhardness change (VHNchange), and transverse microradiography measuring lesion depth (L) and mineral loss (∆Z). Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA.

RESULTS

The two-way interaction of sucrose concentration × surface conditioning was not significant for VHNchange (p=0.872), ∆Z (p=0.662) or L (p=0.436). Surface conditioning affected VHNchange (p=0.0079), while sucrose concentration impacted ∆Z (p<0.0001) and L (p<0.0001). Surface conditioning with filtered/pasteurized saliva resulted in the lowest VHNchange values for both sucrose concentrations. The differences between filtered/pasteurized subgroups and the two other surface conditionings were significant (filtered saliva p=0.006; DIW p=0.0075). Growing the biofilm in 1% sucrose resulted in lesions with higher ∆Z and L values when compared with 0.5% sucrose. The differences in ∆Z and L between sucrose concentration subgroups was significant, regardless of surface conditioning (both p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Within the study limitations, surface conditioning using human saliva does not influence biofilm-mediated enamel caries lesion formation as measured by transverse microradiography, while differences were observed using surface microhardness, indicating a complex interaction between pellicle proteins and biofilm-mediated demineralization of the enamel surface.

A randomized triple-blind crossover trial of a hydrocolloid-containing dentifrice as a controlled-release system for fluoride

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate retention of intraoral fluoride in biofilm and saliva, an experimental dentifrice containing hydrocolloid (tara gum) was used as a controlled-release system for fluoride (F).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a triple-blind randomized crossover trial with washout, 18 individuals used the following different dentifrices for a week: 100-TGF (sodium fluoride NaF associated with tara gum, 1100 mg/L), 50-TGF (50% NaF associated with tara gum + 50% free NaF, 1100 mg/L), PC (free NaF, 1100 mg/L), TG (with tara gum and without F), and placebo (without F or tara gum). On the seventh day of dentifrice use, biofilm was collected at 1 and 12 h, and saliva was collected up to 60 min and 12 h after the last toothbrushing. F concentrations were determined by physico-chemical analysis of fluoride using the hexamethyldisiloxane-facilitated diffusion technique. Data were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (repeated measures) and Spearman's correlation coefficient (p < 0.05) testing.

RESULTS

No significant difference was observed with the same dentifrice regarding F retention in biofilm at 1 and 12 h after toothbrushing for the 100-TGF, placebo, and TG groups (p > 0.05). The highest area under the curve values in saliva were found for the 50-TGF, 100-TGF, and PC groups.

CONCLUSION

The dentifrice containing hydrocolloid as a controlled-release system for F promoted F retention in the oral cavity, even at 12 h after brushing.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Hydrocolloid added to dentifrices as a controlled-release system for F might contribute to a higher anti-caries effect.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02809014.

Effects of dentifrices differing in fluoride compounds on artificial enamel caries lesions in vitro

The aim of this study was to compare the caries-preventive effect of a stabilized stannous fluoride/sodium fluoride dentifrice containing sodium hexametaphosphate with those of a regular, solely sodium fluoride-containing and amine fluoride-containing dentifrice on pre-demineralized bovine enamel specimens using a pH-cycling model. Bovine enamel specimens with two artificial lesions each were prepared. Baseline mineral loss of both lesions was analyzed using transversal microradiography (TMR). Eighty-five specimens with a mean (SD) baseline mineral loss of 3393 (683) vol% × µm were selected and randomly allocated to five groups (n = 13/15). Treatments during pH-cycling (28 days and 2 × 20 min demineralization/day) were: brushing twice daily with slurries of AmF (1400 ppm F^-), NaF (1450 ppm F^-), SnF₂/NaF (1100 ppm F^-/350 ppm F^-), and fluoride-free (FF) dentifrices or they were immersed in distilled water and remained unbrushed (NB). Subsequently, from each specimen one lesion was covered with acid-resistant varnish, while the remaining lesion was demineralized for another 14 days. Differences in integrated mineral loss (∆∆Z) were calculated between values before and after pH-cycling (∆∆Z _E1) as well as before pH-cycling and after second demineralization (∆∆Z _E2) using TMR. Treatments AmF and NaF induced a significantly higher mineral gain (∆∆Z _E1/∆∆Z _E2) compared to treatments FF and NB (p < 0.05; ANOVA test). Except for treatments AmF and NaF no significant differences in mineral loss between before and after pH-cycling could be observed (p < 0.05; t test) [∆∆Z _E1: AmF:1563 (767); NaF:1222 (1246); SnF₂/NaF:258 (1259); FF:-52 (1223); NB:-151 (834)]. Both dentifrices with either AmF or NaF promoted remineralization, whereas SnF₂/NaF dentifrice did not promote remineralization in a biofilm-free pH-cycling model.