使用含氟牙膏对牙齿磨损进行的三维体外测量。

Three-dimensional in vitro measurements of tooth wear using fluoridated dentifrices.

作者信息

Al-Mashhadani A, Plygkos I, Bozec L, Rodriguez J M

机构信息

Prosthodontics Unit, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, United Kingdom.

Biomaterials Unit, UCL Eastman Dental Institute, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Aust Dent J. 2016 Sep;61(3):304-9. doi: 10.1111/adj.12372.

DOI:10.1111/adj.12372

PMID:26303968

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare differences in wear of human enamel and dentine in vitro using a 3D measurement method comparing silica versus non-silica containing fluoridated dentifrices (Colgate Total(™) [CT] or Fluor Protector Gel(™) [FPG]).

METHODS

Mounted native enamel (n = 36) and polished dentine (n = 36) samples were subjected to 10 wear cycles. Each cycle consisted of: (1) 1 hour remineralization in artificial saliva (AS); (2) 10 minute erosion (0.3% citric acid; pH = 2.8); (3) 2 minute toothbrush abrasion in AS (G1, control) or a slurry of 3:1 by weight of AS:dentifrice (G2 = CT; G3 = FPG) under a load of 2 N. Each group contained 12 enamel and 12 dentine samples. Paired pre- and post-wear scans made with a contacting scanner were digitally superimposed using ball bearings as datum.

RESULTS

Mean and (SD) enamel wear was G1 = 21.9 μm (6.4); G2 = 15.2 μm (2.8); G3 = 16.9 μm (3.2). Enamel wear was not different between dentifrices (p = 0.99). Both dentifrices resulted in less enamel wear compared to the control (p < 0.05). Dentine wear was G1 = 41.3 μm (8.1); G2 = 29.1 μm (4.4); G3 = 22.1 μm (3.5). Differences in measurements were observed between dentifrices and control (p < 0.05) and between dentifrices (p = 0.014) with FPG showing less dentine wear than CT.

CONCLUSIONS

FPG offered protection against erosive/abrasive tooth wear in dentine compared to CT. FPG did not offer such protective effect on enamel wear.

摘要

背景

本研究的目的是使用三维测量方法，比较含二氧化硅和不含二氧化硅的含氟牙膏（高露洁全效牙膏[CT]或氟保护凝胶[FPG]）对人牙釉质和牙本质磨损的差异。

方法

将天然牙釉质样本（n = 36）和抛光牙本质样本（n = 36）进行10次磨损循环。每个循环包括：（1）在人工唾液（AS）中再矿化1小时；（2）侵蚀10分钟（0.3%柠檬酸；pH = 2.8）；（3）在2 N的负荷下，在AS中进行2分钟的牙刷磨损（G1，对照组）或按重量比3:1的AS与牙膏的浆液（G2 = CT；G3 = FPG）。每组包含12个牙釉质和12个牙本质样本。使用接触式扫描仪进行磨损前后的配对扫描，并以滚珠轴承为基准进行数字叠加。

结果

牙釉质磨损的平均值（标准差）为：G1 = 21.9μm（6.4）；G2 = 15.2μm（2.8）；G3 = 16.9μm（3.2）。不同牙膏之间的牙釉质磨损没有差异（p = 0.99）。与对照组相比，两种牙膏都导致牙釉质磨损减少（p < 0.05）。牙本质磨损为：G1 = 41.3μm（8.1）；G2 = 29.1μm（4.4）；G3 = 22.1μm（3.5）。观察到不同牙膏与对照组之间的测量差异（p < 0.05），以及不同牙膏之间的差异（p = 0.014），FPG显示出比CT更少的牙本质磨损。