School of Dentistry, Pediatric Dentistry Division, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Ramiro Barcelos St, 2492, Porto Alegre, RS, 90.035-007, Brazil.
Department of Preventive, Restorative and Pediatric Dentistry, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 7, 3010, Bern, Switzerland.
Clin Oral Investig. 2019 Jan;23(1):273-284. doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2434-x. Epub 2018 May 2.
To evaluate the erosive preventive effect of toothpastes in permanent (PT) and deciduous teeth (dt).
Enamel samples were divided into five groups (n = 20): G1: placebo toothpaste; G2: NaF toothpaste; G3: AmF-NaF-SnCl anti-erosion toothpaste; G4: SnFtoothpaste; and G5: NaF anti-erosion toothpaste for children. The samples were exposed to five erosion-abrasion cycles (artificial saliva incubation; 3 min in 1% citric acid; 2 min in slurry, toothbrush abrasion, 50 strokes, 200 g). Surface microhardness (SMH), surface specular reflection intensity (SRI), and cumulative surface loss (CSL) were measured. Comparisons among toothpastes were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis tests and comparisons between PT and dt were evaluated using Wilcoxon's rank sum test.
G1 exhibited significantly lower SMH values in PT than the other toothpastes (p < 0.05), with no significant differences among the others groups. In dt, G1 and G4 exhibited significantly different values than the other groups (p < 0.05). G4 exhibited lower values of SRI in both types of teeth. Deciduous teeth presented significantly higher SRI than PT (p < 0.05), except for G3. Deciduous teeth generally presented higher CSL than PT, except for G3.
Deciduous teeth were more prone to mineral loss than permanent teeth. G5 exhibited better efficacy for both teeth, while G3 exhibited a better preventive effect only for deciduous teeth.
Erosive tooth wear prevalence in children is growing and deciduous teeth are more susceptible than permanent teeth. Considering this, it is important to know the preventive effect of different toothpastes in an initial erosion-abrasion model.
评估牙膏对恒牙（PT）和乳牙（dt）的抗腐蚀作用。
将牙釉质样本分为五组（n=20）：G1：安慰剂牙膏；G2：含氟牙膏；G3：AmF-NaF-SnCl 抗腐蚀牙膏；G4：SnF 牙膏；G5：儿童含氟抗腐蚀牙膏。样本经 5 个腐蚀-磨损周期（人工唾液孵育；3 分钟 1%柠檬酸；2 分钟在浆体中，牙刷磨损，50 次，200 克）暴露。测量表面显微硬度（SMH）、表面镜面反射强度（SRI）和累积表面损失（CSL）。使用 Kruskal-Wallis 检验评估牙膏之间的差异，使用 Wilcoxon 秩和检验评估恒牙和乳牙之间的差异。
G1 在恒牙中的 SMH 值明显低于其他牙膏（p<0.05），而其他组之间无明显差异。在乳牙中，G1 和 G4 与其他组的数值有显著差异（p<0.05）。G4 在两种牙齿中的 SRI 值均较低。乳牙的 SRI 明显高于恒牙（p<0.05），除了 G3。乳牙的 CSL 普遍高于恒牙，除了 G3。
乳牙比恒牙更容易发生矿物质丢失。G5 对两种牙齿均有较好的效果，而 G3 仅对乳牙有较好的预防作用。
儿童的腐蚀性牙齿磨损患病率正在增加，乳牙比恒牙更易受影响。考虑到这一点，在初始腐蚀磨损模型中了解不同牙膏的预防效果非常重要。
