Trial reportOral health & preventive dentistry2020
Efficacy of a Stannous-containing Dentifrice for Protecting Against Combined Erosive and Abrasive Tooth Wear In Situ.
Trial report in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Preventive and Therapeutic Approaches for Dental Erosion: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- Topical Agents for Nonrestorative Management of Dental Erosion: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe in-situ efficacy of an experimental stannous (Sn)-containing sodium fluoride (NaF) dentifrice against erosion and erosive tooth wear was compared with a conventional NaF dentifrice. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial. Mandibular appliances containing four enamel specimens (2 per side [L/R] of the appliance) were worn by 60 generally healthy adult subjects. Subjects were randomised to treatment based on age and gender. Treatments included a Sn-containing NaF or conventional NaF dentifrice. Conditions of erosion (dentifrice slurry treatment) and erosion/tooth wear (dentifrice slurry plus brushing) were compared. Dentifrices were used twice per day for 30 s of lingual brushing, followed by 90 s of slurry exposure. In addition, the two specimens on the left side of the mouth were brushed for 5 s each, using a power toothbrush. All specimens were exposed to four daily erosive challenges with commercial orange juice (pH 3.6). Tooth wear was measured as enamel loss using non-contact profilometry on day 10.
resultsAt the day 10 visit, the adjusted mean (SE) enamel loss for specimens receiving slurry (erosion) treatment was 4.7 µm (0.61) [Sn-containing NaF] and 8.73 µm (1.12) [NaF control], with results demonstrating a statistically significant benefit for the Sn-containing dentifrice (46.2% benefit; p = 0.009). For specimens exposed to erosion/tooth wear conditions, enamel loss = 6.68 µm (1.29) (Sn-containing NaF) and 10.99 µm (1.29) (NaF group), with results statistically significant (p = 0.048; 39.2% better, favouring the Sn-containing dentifrice). When data were combined, enamel loss (SE) for all specimens subjected to erosion + erosion/tooth wear was 5.61 µm (0.77) (Sn-containing NaF]) and 9.9 µm (1.3) (NaF group). The difference again was statistically significant, favouring the Sn-containing group (p = 0.022; 43.4% better).
conclusionsThe Sn-containing dentifrice demonstrated significantly better protection than did NaF under erosive and erosive/tooth wear conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.