IADR Abstract Archives
Sodium Trimetaphospate Associated With CaneCPI-5 Reduces Enamel Erosion in Vitro
Objectives: This study evaluated in vitro the protective effect of different concentrations of microparticulated sodium trimetaphospate (TMP) associated or not with sugarcane-derived cystatin (CaneCPI-5) against initial enamel erosion.
Methods: 135 bovine enamel specimens were prepared and divided into 9 treatment groups (n=15/group): 1) Deionized water (negative control); 2) Elmex ErosionTM (SnCl2/NaF/AmF - positive control 1); 3) 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5 (positive control 2); 4) 0.5% TMP; 5) 1% TMP; 6) 3% TMP; 7) 0.5% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5; 8) 1% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5 and 9) 3% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5. The specimens were individually treated with the respective solutions (250μL; 2h; 37°C), then incubated in human saliva (250μL; 2h; 37°C) for acquired pellicle formation. The specimens were submitted to erosive challenges (1% citric acid [CA]; pH 3.6; 1mL; 1min; 25°C). These procedures were performed once/day for 3 days. Percentage of surface microhardness change (%SMC) and calcium released to the CA were submitted to statistical analysis (Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn’s tests; p < 0.05).
Results: In general, the treatment with CaneCPI-5 and all combinations between TMP + CaneCPI-5 significantly protected enamel when compared to the negative control group and did not show significant difference compared to Elmex ErosionTM. The isolated TMP groups did not show protection when compared to deionized water. Regarding %SMC, 3% TMP + CaneCPI-5 (26.76±3.01%) was the most effective treatment when compared to the CaneCPI-5 group (36.96±3.49%) (p<0.05). For the calcium released to the CA analysis, the only groups that did not show significant difference in respect to positive control 1 (0.007±0.005mM) was the combination of 0.5% TMP + CaneCPI-5 (0.022±0.011mM) and positive control 2 (0.014±0.012mM), showing a lower amount of calcium released in CA.
Conclusions: TMP associated with CaneCPI-5 increased the protective effect against initial enamel erosion in vitro.
Methods: 135 bovine enamel specimens were prepared and divided into 9 treatment groups (n=15/group): 1) Deionized water (negative control); 2) Elmex ErosionTM (SnCl2/NaF/AmF - positive control 1); 3) 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5 (positive control 2); 4) 0.5% TMP; 5) 1% TMP; 6) 3% TMP; 7) 0.5% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5; 8) 1% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5 and 9) 3% TMP + 0.1mg/mL CaneCPI-5. The specimens were individually treated with the respective solutions (250μL; 2h; 37°C), then incubated in human saliva (250μL; 2h; 37°C) for acquired pellicle formation. The specimens were submitted to erosive challenges (1% citric acid [CA]; pH 3.6; 1mL; 1min; 25°C). These procedures were performed once/day for 3 days. Percentage of surface microhardness change (%SMC) and calcium released to the CA were submitted to statistical analysis (Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn’s tests; p < 0.05).
Results: In general, the treatment with CaneCPI-5 and all combinations between TMP + CaneCPI-5 significantly protected enamel when compared to the negative control group and did not show significant difference compared to Elmex ErosionTM. The isolated TMP groups did not show protection when compared to deionized water. Regarding %SMC, 3% TMP + CaneCPI-5 (26.76±3.01%) was the most effective treatment when compared to the CaneCPI-5 group (36.96±3.49%) (p<0.05). For the calcium released to the CA analysis, the only groups that did not show significant difference in respect to positive control 1 (0.007±0.005mM) was the combination of 0.5% TMP + CaneCPI-5 (0.022±0.011mM) and positive control 2 (0.014±0.012mM), showing a lower amount of calcium released in CA.
Conclusions: TMP associated with CaneCPI-5 increased the protective effect against initial enamel erosion in vitro.