GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, Parsippany, NJ 07054, USA.
J Dent. 2010 Nov;38 Suppl 3:S37-44. doi: 10.1016/S0300-5712(11)70007-0.
To compare the effectiveness of dentifrice/mouthrinse regimens in a clinical in situ erosion remineralisation model.
Thirty-six subjects completed a randomised single-blind cross-over trial of five treatment regimens. R1: Dentifrice A [1450 ppm fluoride as the sodium salt (NaF), 50000 ppm potassium nitrate (KNO(3))] plus 450 ppm fluoride (NaF) rinse; R2: Dentifrice A plus sterile water rinse; R3: Dentifrice B (fluoride-free Dentifrice A) plus sterile water rinse; R4: Dentifrice B plus 450 ppm fluoride (NaF) rinse; R5: Dentifrice C (1000 ppm fluorine as sodium monofluorophosphate, 450 ppm fluoride as NaF) plus sterile water rinse. Subjects wore a palatal appliance holding eight pre-demineralised enamel blocks. A 60 min interval separated in vivo use of dentifrice and rinse with the appliance retained in situ for 4h. Efficacy endpoints were percentage surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR) following remineralisation, and percentage relative erosion resistance (%RER) of recovered specimens following a subsequent in vitro erosive challenge. Statistical analyses included ANOVA and selected twin-tailed t-tests.
Mean %SMHR (±SE) was (a)42.14±1.39, (b)38.02±1.39, (c)30.57±1.39, (b)37.75±1.39 and (c)30.88±1.39 for regimens R1-R5 respectively (different superscripts denote statistically significant differences (p<0.05) between treatment regimens). Mean %RER (±SE) was (a)-2.88±2.16, (b)-14.54±2.16, (c)-40.05±2.16, (a)-3.76±2.16 and (d)-29.48±2.16 for regimens R1-R5 respectively. R1 elicited statistically significantly greater %SMHR versus all comparator regimens (p<0.01), and conferred statistically significantly greater %RER than comparator regimens (p<0.0001) except R4 (p=0.70).
The combination treatment of dentifrice A containing 1450 ppm fluoride with the 450 ppm fluoride mouthrinse elicited significant enhancements in rehardening of incipient enamel erosive lesions, and significantly increased their subsequent resistance to a second erosive challenge.
比较牙膏/漱口剂方案在临床原位脱矿再矿化模型中的效果。
36 名受试者完成了五项治疗方案的随机单盲交叉试验。R1：含氟牙膏 A[1450ppm 氟化物（以氟酸钠形式存在），50000ppm 硝酸钾（KNO(3)）]+450ppm 氟化物（NaF）漱口液；R2：含氟牙膏 A+无菌水漱口液；R3：无氟牙膏 B（氟牙膏 A）+无菌水漱口液；R4：无氟牙膏 B+450ppm 氟化物（NaF）漱口液；R5：含氟牙膏 C（1000ppm 氟化物以单氟磷酸钠形式存在，450ppm 氟化物以 NaF 形式存在）+无菌水漱口液。受试者佩戴了一个腭部器械，上面有八个预先脱矿的釉质块。在体内使用牙膏和漱口液后，间隔 60 分钟，用器械将其保留在原位 4 小时。功效终点是再矿化后表面显微硬度恢复的百分比（%SMHR），以及随后体外侵蚀挑战后恢复标本的相对侵蚀抵抗力的百分比（%RER）。统计分析包括方差分析和选定的双尾 t 检验。
R1-R5 治疗方案的平均%SMHR（±SE）分别为（a）42.14±1.39、（b）38.02±1.39、（c）30.57±1.39、（b）37.75±1.39 和（c）30.88±1.39（不同的上标表示治疗方案之间存在统计学显著差异（p<0.05））。R1-R5 治疗方案的平均%RER（±SE）分别为（a）-2.88±2.16、（b）-14.54±2.16、（c）-40.05±2.16、（a）-3.76±2.16 和（d）-29.48±2.16。R1 与所有比较治疗方案相比，%SMHR 差异具有统计学意义（p<0.01），与比较治疗方案相比，%RER 差异具有统计学意义（p<0.0001），除了 R4（p=0.70）。
含氟牙膏 A 与 450ppm 氟化物漱口水联合使用的联合治疗方案显著增强了初始釉质侵蚀病变的再硬化，并显著增加了它们对第二次侵蚀挑战的抵抗力。
