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

ABSTRACT

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.