A randomized double-blind clinical trial evaluating comparative plaque and gingival health associated with commercially available stannous fluoride-containing dentifrices as compared to a sodium fluoride control dentifrice.

BACKGROUND: Gingivitis is a non-specific inflammatory lesion in response to the accumulation of oral biofilm and is a necessary precursor to periodontitis. Enhanced oral hygiene practices, including utilization of a dentifrice that could significantly improve plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation, is desirable to prevent and treat gingivitis and potentially prevent progression to periodontitis. This clinical study aimed to investigate the effect of a new stannous fluoride-containing dentifrice with 2.6% ethylenediamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) as an anti-tartar agent to reduce plaque index and gingival index over a 3-month study period compared to other commercially-available fluoride-containing dentifrices. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized controlled clinical study evaluated plaque, gingival inflammation, and sulcular bleeding in patients using one of five commercially available fluoride-containing dentifrices The dentifrices tested contained: 0.454% stannous fluoride and 2.6% EDTA (D1), 0.24% sodium fluoride (C), and 0.454% stannous fluoride (D2-D4). One hundred fifty subjects participated over a 3-month period. Co-primary endpoints were improvements in plaque index (PI) and modified gingival index (mGI) from baseline values. No professional cleaning was performed during the study period. RESULTS: All subjects in the study demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all measures of oral hygiene over the 3-month study period. Subjects using dentifrice 1 (D1) showed statistically significantly greater reductions in PI, mGI, and modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI) compared with all other commercially-available dentifrices tested (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: A new dentifrice with 0.454% stannous fluoride and 2.6% EDTA demonstrated significant improvements in clinical parameters associated with gingivitis compared to other sodium and stannous fluoride containing dentifrices.

Managing the care of patients receiving antiresorptive therapy for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: executive summary of recommendations from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs.

BACKGROUND: This narrative review of osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with low bone mass receiving treatment with antiresorptive agents is based on an appraisal of the literature by an advisory committee of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. It updates the committee's 2008 advisory statement. METHODS: The authors searched MEDLINE for literature published between May 2008 (the end date of the last search) and February 2011. RESULTS: This report contains recommendations based on the findings of the literature search and on expert opinion that relate to general dentistry; periodontal disease management; implant placement and maintenance; oral and maxillofacial surgery; endodontics; restorative dentistry and prosthodontics; orthodontics; and C-terminal telopeptide testing and drug holidays. CONCLUSIONS: The highest reliable estimate of antiresorptive agent-induced osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) prevalence is approximately 0.10 percent. Osteoporosis is responsible for considerable morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the benefit provided by antiresorptive therapy outweighs the low risk of developing osteonecrosis of the jaw. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: An oral health program consisting of sound hygiene practices and regular dental care may be the optimal approach for lowering ARONJ risk. No validated diagnostic technique exists to determine which patients are at increased risk of developing ARONJ. Discontinuing bisphosphonate therapy may not lower the risk but may have a negative effect on low-bone-mass-treatment outcomes.

Dentist/pharmacist relations: professional responsibility, scope of practice, and rational prescription writing. Interview by Debra Belt.

Earlier this year, CDA engaged the California Pharmacists Association in discussion about the relationship between dentists and pharmacists and the most efficient ways to handle prescriptions. Professionals agree that the situation where a pharmacist fails to fill a dentist-written prescription does not occur frequently. However, when it does occur, all parties--the dentist, the pharmacist and the patient--are challenged. This discussion led to the following interview.

Updated recommendations for managing the care of patients receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy: an advisory statement from the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs.

BACKGROUND: and Overview. In 2005, the American Dental Association (ADA) Council on Scientific Affairs convened an expert panel to develop clinical recommendations for dentists treating patients who are receiving oral bisphosphonate therapy. The Journal of the American Dental Association published the resulting report in 2006. This 2008 advisory statement is the first of projected periodic updates of the 2006 clinical recommendations. CONCLUSION: This 2008 advisory statement concludes, on the basis of a review of the current literature, that for patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy, the risk of developing bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis (BON) of the jaw apparently remains low. It also newly concludes that current screening and diagnostic tests are unreliable for predicting a patient's risk of developing the condition. This statement updates the 2006 recommendations regarding general dentistry, management of periodontal diseases, implant placement and maintenance, oral and maxillofacial surgery, endodontics, restorative dentistry and prosthodontics, and orthodontics.

Epilepsy and the dental management of the epileptic patient.

AIM: The aim of this article is to educate oral healthcare providers on the diagnosis and treatment of epilepsy and seizure disorders. It also shows the impact of epilepsy on the oral cavity and provides suggestions on the dental management of epileptic patients. REVIEW: Epilepsy and seizure disorders affect 1.5 million Americans. The disease is caused by a number of genetic, physiologic, and infectious disorders as well as trauma. Treatment is primarily pharmaceutical but can also be surgical. The disease itself and the pharmaceutical management often have an impact on the oral cavity. Primary management considerations are the provision of good periodontal care and the restoration of the teeth with stable, strong restorations. CONCLUSIONS: With proper understanding of patients with epilepsy and seizure disorders and their medical treatment, the dental care team can safely and effectively render dental care that will benefit the patient and minimize the risk of oral health problems in the future.

Managing the care of patients with bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis: an American Academy of Oral Medicine position paper.

BACKGROUND: This position paper addresses the prevention of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis (BON) and the management of care of patients with cancer and/or osteoporosis who are receiving bisphosphonates and who have BON or are at risk of developing it. METHODS: The authors reviewed the literature available on this newly described oral complication. Information of interest included bisphosphonates, the medications associated with this oral complication; the patient population at risk of developing BON and the diseases being treated with this class of medications; the clinical presentation of the oral lesions; guidelines for managing the care of patients who develop BON; the prevention of this complication based on current knowledge; and recommendations for routine dental treatment of patients receiving bisphosphonates. RESULTS: There is strong evidence that bisphosphonate therapy is the common link in patients with BON. The pathobiological mechanism leading to BON may have to do with the inhibition of bone remodeling and decreased intraosseous blood flow caused by bisphosphonates. People at risk include patients with multiple myeloma and patients with cancer metastatic to bone who are receiving intravenous bisphosphonates, as well as patients taking bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. The risk of developing complications appears to increase with time of use of the medication. There are no guidelines based on evidence, and the clinical management of the oral complication is based on expert opinion. CONCLUSION: Prevention of BON is the best approach to management of this complication. Existing protocols to manage the care of patients who will receive radiation therapy or chemotherapy may be used until specific guidelines for BON are developed.

Clinical management of the dental patient taking multiple drugs.

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occur often in elders often due to polypharmacy. Those over 65 currently comprise 13% of the population but consume approximately a third of all drugs prescribed. Increased care when prescribing certain drug classes and careful monitoring of the patient can prevent many ADRs. This article examines four questions that should be addressed when providing dental care for an older patient taking multiple medications. These include: (1) what are the medical conditions that necessitate the medications, (2) what impact do these medical conditions have on the provision of care, (3) what are the oral side effects of the medications, and (4) how will the patient's current list of medications alter the dentist's prescribing patterns for drugs used in dentistry?

Sinusitis as a source of dental pain.

Sinusitis is a common medical problem that can occasionally manifest as dental pain. If the patient is experiencing dental pain in the maxillary posterior teeth, then it is appropriate for the dentist to rule out sinusitis as a source of the problem before proceeding with definitive dental treatment. Often there is an obvious odontogenic source of the pain, and this should be resolved first, but in other situations it is difficult to determine the cause of the symptoms. In some patients, the source of the pain is so equivocal that it may be necessary to treat the patient for sinusitis to eliminate this as the source of the dental pain (Table 7). In this process, the dentist has one of 2 options: either refer the patient to a physician or treat the sinusitis. The option chosen regarding patient management is made by the dentist and depends on the particular clinical situation and the dentist's training and experience.