Evidence for biofilm acid neutralization by baking soda

Background The generating of acids from the microbial metabolism of dietary sugars and the subsequent decrease in biofilm pH below the pH at which tooth mineral begins to demineralize (critical pH) are the key elements of the dental caries process. Caries preventive strategies that rapidly neutralize biofilm acids can prevent demineralization and favor remineralization and may help prevent the development of sugar-induced dysbiosis that shifts the biofilm toward increased cariogenic potential. Although the neutralizing ability of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) has been known for many years, its anticaries potential as an additive to fluoride dentifrice has received only limited investigation. Types of Studies Reviewed There is evidence that baking soda rapidly can reverse the biofilm pH decrease after a sugar challenge; however, the timing of when it is used in relation to a dietary sugar exposure is critical in that the sooner its used the greater the benefit in preventing a sustained biofilm pH decrease and subsequent demineralization. Furthermore, the effectiveness of baking soda in elevating biofilm pH appears to depend on concentration. Thus, the concentration of baking soda in marketed dentifrice products, which ranges from 10% to 65%, may affect their biofilm pH neutralizing performance. People with hyposalivation particularly may benefit from using fluoride dentifrice containing baking soda because of their diminished ability to clear dietary sugars and buffer biofilm acids. Conclusions Although promising, there is the need for more evidence that strategies that modify the oral ecology, such as baking soda, can alter the cariogenic (acidogenic and aciduric) properties of biofilm microorganisms. Practical Implications The acid neutralization of dental biofilm by using fluoride dentifrice that contains baking soda has potential for helping counteract modern high-sugar diets by rapidly neutralizing biofilm-generated acid, especially in people with hyposalivation

An In Situ Caries Study on the Interplay between Fluoride Dose and Concentration in Milk

Objectives This randomized, cross-over in situ study investigated the impact of sodium fluoride dose and concentration in milk on caries lesion rehardening, fluoridation and acid resistance. Methods Twenty-eight subjects wore two gauze-covered enamel specimens with preformed lesions placed buccally on their mandibular partial dentures for three weeks. Participants used fluoride-free dentifrice throughout the study and consumed once daily one of the five study treatments: no fluoride in 200 ml milk (0F-200), 1.5 or 3 mg fluoride in either 100 (1.5F-100; 3F-100) or 200 ml milk (1.5F-200; 3F-200). After three weeks, specimens were retrieved. Knoop hardness was used to determine rehardening and resistance to a secondary acid challenge. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using a microbiopsy technique. Results A linear fluoride dose–response was observed for all study variables which exhibited similar overall patterns. All the treatments resulted in rehardening, with 0F-200 inducing the least and 3F-100 the most. Apart from 1.5F-200, all the treatments resulted in statistically significantly more rehardening compared to 0F-200. The fluoride doses delivered in 100 ml provided directionally although not statistically significantly more rehardening than those delivered in 200 ml milk. EFU data exhibited better differentiation between treatments: all fluoridated milk treatments delivered more fluoride to lesions than 0F-200; fluoride in 100 ml demonstrated statistically significantly higher EFU than fluoride in 200 ml milk. Findings for acid resistance were also more discerning than rehardening data. Conclusions The present study has provided further evidence for the anti-caries benefits of fluoridated milk. Both fluoride dose and concentration appear to impact the cariostatic properties of fluoride in milk

In vitro caries lesion rehardening and enamel fluoride uptake from fluoride varnishes as a function of application mode

PURPOSE: To study the laboratory predicted anticaries efficacy of five commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) by determining their ability to reharden and to deliver fluoride to an early caries lesion when applied directly or in close vicinity to the lesion (halo effect). METHODS: Early caries lesions were created in 80 polished bovine enamel specimens. Specimens were allocated to five FV groups (n = 16) based on Knoop surface microhardness (KHN) after lesion creation. All tested FV claimed to contain 5% sodium fluoride and were: CavityShield, Enamel Pro, MI Varnish, Prevident and Vanish. FV were applied (10 +/- 2 mg per lesion) to eight specimens per FV group (direct application); the remaining eight specimens received no FV but were later exposed to fluoride released from specimens which received a FV treatment (indirect application). Specimens were paired again and placed into containers (one per FV). Artificial saliva was added and containers placed into an incubator (27 hours at 37 degrees C). Subsequently, FV was carefully removed using chloroform. Specimens were exposed to fresh artificial saliva again (67 hours at 37 degrees C). KHN was measured and differences to baseline values calculated. Enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) was determined using the acid etch technique. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA. RESULTS: The two-way ANOVA highlighted significant interactions between FV vs. application mode, for both deltaKHN and EFU (P < 0.001). All FV were able to reharden and deliver fluoride to caries lesions, but to different degrees. Furthermore, considerable differences were found for both variables between FV when applied either directly or in close vicinity to the lesion: MI Varnish and Enamel Pro exhibited greater fluoride efficacy when applied in vicinity rather than directly to the lesion, whereas CavityShield and Vanish did not differ. Prevident exhibited a higher EFU when applied directly, but little difference in rehardening

COVID-19 and saliva: A primer for dental health care professionals

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or be any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.To contain the COVID‐19 pandemic, it is essential to find methods that can be used by a wide range of health care professionals to identify the virus. The less potential contagious nature of the collection process, the ease of collection and the convenience of frequent collection for real‐time monitoring makes saliva an excellent specimen for home‐based collection for epidemiological investigations. With respect to COVID‐19, the use of saliva offers the added advantages of greater sensitivity and potential for detection at an early stage of infection. However, the advantages from a diagnostic perspective also reflect the potential risk to dental professionals from saliva from infected patients. Although not validated in COVID‐19 patients, but by extension from studies of SARS‐CoV‐1 studies, it is suggested that using antimicrobial mouthrinses such as chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide or sodium hypochlorite solutions could reduce the viral load in saliva droplets and reduce the risk of direct transmission. Because large saliva droplets could deposit on inanimate surfaces, changing the personal protective equipment including the clinical gown, gloves, masks, protective eye wear and face shield between patients, as well as decontamination of the work surfaces in the clinic, could reduce the risk of indirect contact transmission

In situ anticaries efficacy of dentifrices with different formulations – A pooled analysis of results from three randomized clinical trials

Objectives Data generated from three similar in situ caries crossover studies presented the opportunity to conduct a pooled analysis to investigate how dentifrice formulations with different fluoride salts and combinations at concentrations of 1400–1450 ppm F, different abrasive systems and in some cases, carbomer (Carb), affect enamel caries lesion remineralization and fluoridation. Methods Subjects continuously wore modified partial dentures holding two gauze-covered partially-demineralized human enamel specimens for 14 days and brushed 2×/day with their assigned dentifrice: Study 1: sodium fluoride (NaF)/Carb/silica, NaF/silica, NaF + monofluorophosphate (MFP)/chalk; Study 2: NaF/Carb/silica, NaF + MFP/dical, amine fluoride (AmF)/silica; Study 3: NaF/Carb/silica, NaF + stannous fluoride (SnF2)/silica/hexametaphosphate (HMP). All studies included Placebo (0 ppm F) and/or dose-response controls (675 ppm F as NaF [675F-NaF]) ±Carb. Specimens were evaluated for percentage surface microhardness recovery (SMHR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU). Results All 1400–1450 ppm F dentifrices except NaF + SnF2/silica/HMP provided significantly greater lesion remineralization than Placebo (p < 0.0001): differences in SMHR ranged from 17.46% (NaF + MFP/dical) to 26.66% (AmF/silica). For EFU (back-transformed log EFU), all 1400–1450 ppm F dentifrices gave significant fluoride uptake compared to Placebo (p < 0.0001): increases in EFU ranged from 4.95 μg F/cm2 (NaF + SnF2/silica/HMP) to 16.32 μg F/cm2 (NaF/carb/silica). Dentifrices containing NaF or AmF as sole fluoride source provided the greatest remineralization and fluoridation; Carb addition did not alter fluoride efficacy; some excipients appeared to interfere with the cariostatic action of fluoride. Treatments were generally well-tolerated with ≤4 treatment-related adverse events per study. Conclusion Commercially available fluoride dentifrices varied greatly in their ability to remineralize and fluoridate early caries lesions. Clinical significance Fluoride dentifrices are the most impactful anticaries modality worldwide. While clinical caries trials have not consistently shown the superiority of one formulation over another, these findings using a sensitive in situ caries model indicated that dentifrices containing NaF or AmF as the sole fluoride source provided the greatest remineralization and fluoridation benefits

Erosion Remineralization Efficacy of Gel-to-Foam Fluoride Toothpastes in situ: A Randomized Clinical Trial

This single-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, four-treatment, four-period crossover study compared the enamel remineralization effects of low- and medium-abrasivity gel-to-foam toothpastes and a reference toothpaste (all 1,450 ppm fluoride as NaF) versus placebo toothpaste (0 ppm fluoride) using a short-term in situ erosion model. Subjects (n = 56) wearing a palatal appliance holding acid-softened bovine enamel specimens brushed their teeth with the test toothpastes. Thereafter, the specimens were removed for analysis of percent surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR) and percent relative erosion resistance (%RER) at 2, 4, and 8 h. Both low- and medium-abrasivity gel-to-foam fluoride toothpastes and the reference toothpaste provided significantly greater %SMHR than placebo at all assessment time points (all p < 0.05). No statistically significant difference of %SMHR was observed between the fluoride treatment groups at any time point. Similarly, all fluoride products provided significantly superior %RER versus placebo (all p < 0.0001), whereas no significant difference of this parameter was noted between the fluoride treatment groups. Increasing numerical improvements of %SMHR and %RER were observed in all four treatment groups over time (2, 4, and 8 h). The present in situ model is a sensitive tool to investigate intrinsic and fluoride-enhanced rehardening of eroded enamel. All three fluoride toothpastes were more efficacious than placebo, and there were no safety concerns following single dosing in this short-term in situ model

A randomised clinical evaluation of a fluoride mouthrinse and dentifrice in an in situ caries model

Objectives Fluoride mouthrinses provide advantages for fluoride delivery by maintaining elevated intra-oral fluoride concentrations following fluoride dentifrice use. This in situ caries study investigated potential anti-caries efficacy of a 220 ppm fluoride mouthrinse. Methods This was an analyst-blinded, four-treatment, randomised, crossover study using partially demineralised, gauze-wrapped, human enamel samples mounted in a mandibular partial denture. Participants brushed twice daily for 14 days with either a 1150 ppm fluoride or a fluoride-free placebo dentifrice and either rinsed once daily with the 220 ppm fluoride mouthrinse or not. Following each treatment period, percent surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR) and enamel fluoride uptake (EFU) were assessed. Results Fifty three participants completed the study. Compared with the placebo dentifrice/no rinse treatment, the fluoride-containing regimens demonstrated greater enamel remineralisation (%SMHR) and fluoridation (EFU): fluoride dentifrice/fluoride rinse (%SMHR difference: 21.55 [95% CI: 15.78,27.32]; EFU difference 8.35 [7.21,9.29]); fluoride dentifrice/no rinse: 19.48 [13.81,25.15]; 6.47 [5.35,7.60]; placebo dentifrice/fluoride rinse: 16.76 [11.06,22.45]; 5.87 [4.72,7.00] (all P < .0001). There were no significant differences in%SMHR between fluoride regimens. The fluoride dentifrice/fluoride rinse regimen was associated with higher EFU than the fluoride dentifrice/no rinse (1.88 [0.75,3.01], P = .0013) and placebo dentifrice/fluoride rinse regimens (2.48 [1.34,3.62], P < .0001). Treatments were generally well-tolerated. Conclusions The in situ caries model demonstrated that the fluoride mouthrinse is effective in promoting enamel caries lesion remineralisation and fluoridation whether used following a fluoride or non-fluoride dentifrice. Additive (potential) anti-caries benefits of a fluoride rinse after a fluoride dentifrice were confined to enhancements in lesion fluoridation (EFU). Clinical significance In conjunction with a fluoride dentifrice, fluoride mouthrinses enhance enamel fluoridation, which may be useful in caries prevention

Anticaries Potential of a Sodium Monofluorophosphate Dentifrice Containing Calcium Sodium Phosphosilicate: Exploratory in situ Randomized Trial

Calcium sodium phosphosilicate (CSPS) is a bioactive glass material that alleviates dentin hypersensitivity and is postulated to confer remineralization of caries lesions. This single-centre, randomized, single (investigator)-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, in situ study explored whether the addition of 5% CSPS to a nonaqueous fluoride (F) such as sodium monofluorophosphate (SMFP)-containing dentifrice affects its cariostatic ability. Seventy-seven subjects wore 4 gauze-covered enamel specimens with preformed lesions (2 surface-softened and 2 subsurface) placed buccally on their mandibular bilateral dentures for up to 4 weeks. Subjects brushed twice daily with 1 of the 5 study dentifrices: 927 ppm F/5% CSPS, 927 ppm F/0% CSPS, 250 ppm F/0% CSPS, 0 ppm F/5% CSPS, or 0 ppm F/0% CSPS. Specimens were retrieved after either 21 (surface-softened lesions; analyzed by Knoop surface microhardness [SMH]) or 28 days (subsurface lesions; analyzed by transverse microradiography). The enamel fluoride uptake was determined for all specimens using a microbiopsy technique. The concentrations of fluoride and calcium in gauze-retrieved plaque were also evaluated. Higher dentifrice fluoride concentrations led to greater remineralization and fluoridation of both lesion types and increased plaque fluoride concentrations. CSPS did not improve the cariostatic properties of SMFP; there were no statistically significant differences between 927 ppm F/5% CSPS and 927 ppm F/0% CSPS in percent SMH recovery (p = 0.6788), change in integrated mineral loss (p = 0.5908), or lesion depth (p = 0.6622). Likewise, 0 ppm F/5% CSPS did not provide any benefits in comparison to 0 ppm F/0% CSPS. In conclusion, CSPS does not negatively impact nor does it improve the ability of an SMFP dentifrice to affect remineralization of caries lesions

Pilot clinical study to assess caries lesion activity using quantitative light-induced fluorescence during dehydration

This study aimed to evaluate the ability of quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF) to assess caries lesion activity using visual examination (VE) as the gold standard. Twenty-four visible white spot lesions on buccal surfaces were examined from 23 children, ages 9 to 14 years. At baseline, the surface was hydrated with water, and thereafter, it was dehydrated with continuous compressed air during image acquisition. QLF images were acquired at 0 (baseline), 5, and 15 s. QLF variables [ QLF V : fluorescence loss ( ? F ), lesion size (S), ? Q : ? F × S ] was recorded. Changes-in- QLF V per second ( ? QLF V ) were determined: ? QLF V = ( QLF VN ? QLF V Baseline ) / N , where N indicates dehydration time. One experienced dentist conducted VE independently using a dental unit’s light, compressed air, and explorer

In situ Fluoride Response of Caries Lesions with Different Mineral Distributions at Baseline

The present in situ study investigated the fluoride response of caries lesions with similar mineral loss but two distinct mineral distributions (low- and high-‘R’, calculated as the ratio of mineral loss to lesion depth). Sixteen subjects wore eight gauze-covered enamel specimens with preformed lesions placed buccally on their mandibular partial dentures for periods up to 4 weeks. The participants brushed twice daily for 1 min with an 1,100 ppm F (as NaF) dentifrice. After 3 and 4 weeks, specimens were retrieved and analyzed microradiographically (TMR) and by quantitative light fluorescence (QLF). TMR results revealed that low- and high-R lesions showed opposite behaviors – low-R lesions further demineralized, whereas high-R lesions exhibited some remineralization. In comparison, lesion depth increased in low-R, but remained unchanged in high-R lesions; R decreased in both, but more in high-R lesions; mineral density at the lesion surface remained unchanged in low-R, but increased in high-R lesions. Differences in mineral loss between lesion types increased further between 3 and 4 weeks. QLF did not mirror TMR results as low-R lesions were found to remineralize, whereas high-R lesions remained unchanged. It is likely that low-R lesions differ from high-R lesions chemically and microstructurally; therefore rendering low-R lesion more susceptible to further dissolution. During lesion formation, low-R in contrast to high-R lesions may not lose all of the solubility-determining impurities such as magnesium and carbonate, which can reprecipitate again in different mineral phases within the lesion. In conclusion, mineral distribution at baseline directly impacts in situ lesion response to fluoride