IADR Abstract Archives

Fluoride Dose-response of a Modified In situ caries Model

Objectives: Evaluate the fluoride (F) dose-response of 0/250/500/1100 ppm F of our standard in situ model (SM) involving human enamel specimens with a modified model (MM) involving bovine enamel specimens.
Methods: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, four-way-crossover-design in situ study, healthy subjects (n=27) wore intra-oral partial denture appliances containing four gauze-covered partially-demineralized enamel specimens: two 4×4 mm human enamel specimens placed in the subject’s partial denture buccal flange area (SM); two 4 mm round bovine enamel specimens placed in a denture tooth location on the same side of the partial denture (MM). Subjects applied their assigned dentifrice by brushing for 1 min 2 x day: NaF/silica/toothpaste with either 0 ppm F, 250 ppm F (dose-response control), 500 ppm F (dose-response control), or 1100 ppm F (positive control). Enamel specimens were removed after 14-day intra-oral exposure. Outcome measures assessed were: % surface microhardness recovery (%SMHR), net acid resistance (NAR), comparative acid resistance (CAR), enamel fluoride uptake (EFU), transverse microradiography (TMR Delta Z; TMR L).
Results: Nothing was statistically significant for the MM vs SM comparisons. Models were equivalent for TMR L (any F level), TMR Delta Z at 250 ppm F, %SMHR, NAR and CAR (0 and 250 ppm F). MM performed in a similar manner to SM for the key outcome measures (%SMHR and EFU) and in general appears to have greater sensitivity to distinguish the effects of F for all outcome measures.
Conclusions: The modified model with bovine enamel placed in denture teeth performed in a similar manner to the standard model with human teeth placed in the buccal flange, and thus is suitable for future in situ studies comparing dentifrice product treatments.
Division: IADR/AADR/CADR General Session
Meeting: 2019 IADR/AADR/CADR General Session (Vancouver, BC, Canada)
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Year: 2019
Final Presentation ID: 3436
Abstract Category|Abstract Category(s): Cariology Research-Demineralization/Remineralization
Authors
  • Zero, Domenick  ( Indiana University School of Dentistry , Indianapolis , Indiana , United States )
  • Lippert, Frank  ( Indiana University School of Dentistry , Indianapolis , Indiana , United States )
  • Hara, Anderson  ( Indiana University School of Dentistry , Indianapolis , Indiana , United States )
  • Eckert, George  ( Indiana University School of Medicine , Indianapolis , Indiana , United States )
  • Support Funding Agency/Grant Number: Supported by an Investigator-Sponsored Studies Grant from GSK Consumer Healthcare
    Financial Interest Disclosure: NONE
    SESSION INFORMATION
    Oral Session
    Demineralization/Remineralization II
    Saturday, 06/22/2019 , 02:00PM - 03:30PM
    TABLES
    Ratio to 1100 ppm F for all Outcome Measures for Modified Model (MM) and Standard Model (SM)
    OutcomeRatio to 1100 ppm F (mean of 'x' ppm F / mean of 1100 ppm F)
    MMSM
    0 ppm F250 ppm F500 ppm F0 ppm F250 ppm F500 ppm F
    %SMHR0.29*a0.63*b0.85c0.28*a0.61*b0.81 b
    SMH NAR-0.77*a0.36*b0.60*b-1.19*a0.08*b0.48 b
    SMH CAR2.36*a1.23b1.44b2.83*a1.57 b1.46 b
    EFU0.32*a0.76*b0.91*c0.35*a0.78*b0.92*c
    TMR Delta Z1.83*a1.33b0.98 b1.78*a1.06 b1.05 b
    TMR L1.92*a1.54b1.29 b1.69*a1.17 b1.04 b
    Treatments with the same letter were not statistically significantly different from each other (ANOVA model; p>0.05). * indicates significant difference from 1100 ppm F positive control.