Randomized in vivo trial evaluating plaque inhibition benefits of an advanced stannous-containing sodium fluoride dentifrice used in conjunction with power brush technology.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the plaque inhibition efficacy of a novel stannous-containing sodium fluoride test dentifrice to a standard anticavity negative control dentifrice, when both were used in conjunction with an advanced oscillating-rotating (O/R) power toothbrush. METHODS: This was a randomized, two-treatment, three-period, double-blind crossover study conducted in a population using an O/R power brush. Subjects brushed twice per day with their assigned dentifrice during the three-treatment periods, each lasting for 17 consecutive days. Each period was separated by a 4-day washout period during which subjects continued to use their O/R power toothbrush. Plaque levels were assessed and averaged amongst three assessments taken on days 15, 16 and 17 at the end of each treatment period using digital plaque imaging analysis. Assessments were carried out on the facial anterior tooth surfaces in the morning before brushing (A.M. prebrush) following whole-mouth brushing (30 s per quadrant) with the assigned dentifrice (A.M. post-brush) and in the afternoon (P.M.). RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects were randomized and completed the study. During the 17-day usage period, the stannous-containing test NaF dentifrice demonstrated a statistically significant lower mean plaque area versus the negative control dentifrice at each assessment timepoint; overnight A.M. prebrush was 33.8% lower (P < 0.0001), A.M. post-brush was 21.8% lower (P < 0.01), and P.M. was 29.2% lower (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: A population of O/R power toothbrush users had significantly less plaque coverage for all three measurements when using a stannous-containing NaF dentifrice than when using a negative control (fluoride) dentifrice.

In vitro comparison of stannous fluoride, sodium fluoride, and sodium monofluorophosphate dentifrices in the prevention of enamel erosion.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative performance of commercially available dentifrices containing different types of fluoride to reduce enamel erosion from citric acid. METHODS: Two randomized parallel-group experiments were conducted, each with 48 bovine enamel samples randomly divided into six treatment legs. Each treatment leg went through 24 toothpaste treatment cycles, acid challenge (0.05M citric acid), and remineralization in artificial saliva. Total acid immersion after all cycles was 300 minutes for each test product; two test products in Experiment 1 were also evaluated for 180 minutes for comparison. Samples were analyzed blinded to treatment group for enamel loss by contact profilometry. One stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice was compared to three sodium fluoride (NaF) dentifrices, two sodium monofluorophosphate (MFP) dentifrices, and one MFP plus calcium sodium phosphosilicate (CSP) dentifrice. All fluoride levels were 1450 ppm. A water control was also included. RESULTS: The dentifrice containing stabilized SnF2 was significantly (p < 0.0001) better at preventing enamel erosion compared to the NaF and MFP dentifrices. The SnF, dentifrice provided a 61.7% (p < 0.0001) reduction in enamel loss versus the water control. The comparable figures for NaF and MFP dentifrices were 36-39% (p < 0.0001) and 33% (p < 0.0001) reductions, respectively, compared to the water control. The MFP+CSP dentifrice was significantly (p < 0.05) less effective, providing a 23.2% (p = 0.0007) reduction versus the water control. CONCLUSION: Of the dentifrices included in this research, the stabilized SnF, dentifrice was the most effective at reducing enamel erosion from citric acid.

Randomized digital plaque imaging trial evaluating plaque inhibition efficacy of a novel stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice compared with an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride dentifrice.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the plaque inhibition efficacy ofa novel 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride test dentifrice (SnF2) to an amine fluoride/stannous fluoride marketed control dentifrice (AmF/SnF2) using digital plaque imaging analysis (DPIA). METHODS: The 10-week study was a randomized, two-treatment, three-period, double-blind crossover design. Subjects brushed twice daily with their assigned dentifrice (SnF2 or AmF/SnF2) using a standard manual toothbrush during three treatment periods each lasting 17 days, separated by four-day washout periods. DPIA was used to analyze plaque coverage on facial surfaces of the 12 anterior teeth (canine to canine) by three assessments on Days 15, 16, and 17 at the end of each treatment period. Assessments were conducted the morning following no overnight brushing of facial surfaces (A.M. pre-brush), after 40 seconds of full mouth brushing with the assigned dentifrice (A.M. post-brush), and during the afternoon (P.M.). RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects were randomized and completed the study. At each assessment time point, plaque levels for the SnF2 dentifrice were statistically significantly lower compared to those for the AmF/SnF2 dentifrice (21.4%, 22.6%, 24.3%, respectively; p < 0.0001 for all). CONCLUSION: Plaque coverage, as assessed by DPIA, was significantly lower with a novel SnF2 dentifrice than with the AmF/SnF2 dentifrice. The plaque control benefits of the SnF2 dentifrice seen at the morning and afternoon time points indicated significantly better inhibition of plaque re-growth.

Can anti-erosion dentifrices also provide effective plaque control?

OBJECTIVE: While gingivitis and caries continue to be prevalent issues, there is growing concern about dental erosion induced by dietary acids. An oral hygiene product that protects against all these conditions would be beneficial. This study investigated the potential of two anti-erosion dentifrices to inhibit plaque. METHODS: This was a randomized, three-period, two-treatment, double-blind, crossover study evaluating a stannous chloride/sodium fluoride dentifrice (SnCl(2)/NaF, blend-a-med(®) Pro Expert) and a popular anti-erosion dentifrice (NaF, Sensodyne(®) ProNamel(™)). During Period 3, subjects were randomized to repeat one treatment to evaluate any product carryover effects. Each treatment period was 17 days. Test dentifrices were used with a standard manual toothbrush. Digital plaque image analysis (DPIA) was employed at the end of each period to evaluate plaque levels (i) overnight (am prebrush); (ii) post-brushing with the test product (am post-brush); and (iii) mid-afternoon (pm). Analysis was conducted via an objective computer algorithm, which calculated total area of visible plaque. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects completed the study. At all time points, subjects had statistically significantly (P ≤ 0.0001) lower plaque levels after using the SnCl(2)/NaF dentifrice than the NaF dentifrice. The antiplaque benefit for the SnCl(2)/NaF dentifrice versus the NaF dentifrice was: am prebrush = 26.0%; am post-brushing = 27.9%; pm = 25.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The SnCl(2)/NaF dentifrice provided significantly greater daytime and overnight plaque inhibition than the NaF toothpaste. When recommending dentifrice to patients susceptible to dental erosion, clinicians can consider one that also inhibits plaque.

Clinical comparison of plaque inhibition effects of a novel stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice and a chlorhexidine digluconate dentifrice using digital plaque imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the plaque inhibition efficacy of a novel 0.454% stannous fluoride (SnF2) test dentifrice with sodium hexametaphosphate and stannous chloride to a chlorhexidine digluconate (0.05%), aluminium lactate (0.8%), and aluminium fluoride marketed control dentifrice (Lacalut Aktiv or AlF3/Chx). METHODS: This was a randomized, two-treatment, two-period, double-blind crossover study that compared the SnF2 test dentifrice to the AlF3/Chx control dentifrice. Each of the two treatment periods lasted for 17 consecutive days of product use, during which subjects were required to brush twice per day with their assigned dentifrice using a standard manual toothbrush (Oral-B P35 Indicator). The two periods of the crossover were separated by a four-day washout period. Plaque levels on the facial anterior tooth surfaces were evaluated and averaged among three assessment days at the end of each treatment period using digital plaque imaging analysis (DPIA). The evening prior to assessments, subjects only brushed lingual surfaces. Assessment time points were carried out in the morning following no morning brushing (A.M. pre-brush), following 40 seconds of brushing with the assigned dentifrice (A.M. post-brush), and in the afternoon (P.M.). The DPIA captured images were used to calculate and analyze visible plaque coverage. RESULTS: Twenty-eight subjects were randomized and completed the study. At each assessment time point, the SnF2 test dentifrice demonstrated a statistically significant lower plaque level compared to the AlF3/Chx dentifrice: A.M. mean pre-brush 15.9% lower, p < 0.05; A.M. mean post-brush 22.2% lower, p < 0.05; P.M. mean 24.3% lower, p < 0.005. CONCLUSION: Compared to the AlF3/Chx control dentifrice, the novel SnF2 test dentifrice significantly inhibited plaque regrowth overnight and during the day. Immediately after brushing there was also significantly less plaque coverage with the SnF2 test dentifrice.

A randomized clinical study comparing the plaque inhibition effect of a SnF2/SHMP dentifrice (blend-a-med EXPERT GUMS PROTECTION) and a chlorhexidine digluconate dentifrice (Lacalut Aktiv).

OBJECTIVE: To compare the plaque inhibition benefits of a control 0.454% stannous fluoride/sodium hexametaphosphate/sodium fluoride dentifrice (SnF2/SHMP with 1450 ppm F) to a chlorhexidine digluconate (0.05%), aluminum lactate (0.8%), and aluminum fluoride (AlF3/Chx with 1400 ppm F) dentifrice. METHODS: Twenty-nine subjects were randomized to a two-period, two-treatment, double-blind crossover sequence using blend-a-med EXPERT GUMS PROTECTION toothpaste (SnF2/SHMP) and Lacalut Aktiv toothpaste (AlF3/Chx). Each treatment was used along with a standard manual toothbrush (Oral-B P35 Indicator) for 17 days. Digital plaque image analysis (DPIA) was used at the end of each period for three consecutive days to evaluate plaque levels; a) overnight (A.M. pre-brush); b) following 40 seconds of brushing with the test product (A.M. post-brush); and c) mid-afternoon (P.M.). Images were analyzed using an objective computer algorithm to calculate the total area of visible plaque. A four-day washout period was instituted for the crossover phase. RESULTS: Twenty-seven subjects completed the study. The SnF2/SHMP dentifrice provided a statistically significant lower level of plaque area coverage compared to the AlF3/Chx dentifrice at all time points. For the SnF2/SHMP dentifrice, plaque coverage was 19.4% lower (p = 0.0043) at the A.M. pre-brush, 25.6% lower (p = 0.0014) at the A.M. post-brush, and 19.8% lower (p = 0.0057) at the P.M. measure relative to the AlF3/Chx dentifrice. CONCLUSION: The blend-a-med EXPERT GUMS PROTECTION toothpaste inhibits plaque regrowth, both overnight and during the day, to a significantly greater degree than Lacalut Aktiv. Additionally, immediately after brushing with blend-a-med EXPERT GUMS PROTECTION, subjects had significantly less plaque than after brushing with Lacalut Aktiv.