Stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice in relation to dental caries, dental erosion and dentin hypersensitivity: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To review the scientific evidence for the efficacy of stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice in relation to dental caries, dental erosion and dentin hypersensitivity. METHODS: Medline OVID, Embase.com, and the Cochrane Library were searched until January 2018. Two researchers independently selected studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, data were extracted, the risk of bias in eligible studies was assessed and a meta-analysis was performed wherever feasible. RESULTS: Three studies on dental caries, eight studies on dental erosion and 11 on dentin hypersensitivity were included. Risk of bias was judged as high for most of the caries and erosion studies and low or medium for the hypersensitivity studies. A similar or slightly higher anti-caries activity compared with non-stannous fluoride dentifrices was observed. Stannous fluoride showed a greater anti-erosive potential in seven of the eight studies. A mean difference score in favor of stannous fluoride dentifrices compared with controls was found in a meta-analysis including six 8-week hypersensitivity studies. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The use of stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrices to relieve dentin hypersensitivity and to prevent the initiation of dental erosion speaks in favor of this treatment strategy.

Dental biofilm, gingivitis and interleukin-1 adjacent to approximal sites of a bonded ceramic.

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate in vivo the influence of aged, resin-bonded, ceramic restorations on approximal dental biofilm formation and gingival inflammatory response, associated with and without customary oral hygiene. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional and in a 10-day experimental gingivitis study, Quigley-Hein plaque index, gingival index (GI), crevicular fluid and its levels of interleukin (IL)-1alpha, -1beta and receptor antagonist were measured at appoximal surfaces of leucite-reinforced bonded ceramic coverages, resin composite restorations and enamel and compared intra-individually in 17 participants. RESULTS: No differences were found between the ceramic, composite and enamel regarding plaque index, GI, levels of IL-1alpha, -1beta and the receptor antagonist. Throughout, higher crevicular fluid amounts were observed at ceramic sites compared with the enamel (p<0.05). In the experimental gingivitis, plaque index, GI, crevicular fluid and its IL-1alpha levels increased significantly. CONCLUSION: The need for optimal oral hygiene and professional preventive oral health care does not seem to be reduced with regard to approximal surfaces of aged, resin-bonded, leucite-reinforced ceramic restorations in comparison with those of a hybrid, resin composite and enamel.

Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in plaque on a leucite-reinforced dental ceramic and on a calcium aluminate cement.

In this in vivo study, the proportions of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in plaque were examined (1) on proximal surfaces of bonded, leucite-reinforced ceramic crowns and (2) on class V restorations of calcium aluminate cement (CAC). The examined proportions were intraindividually compared with those of resin composite and enamel. Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in samples from plaque that was accumulated for 10 days on the following surfaces were determined by cultivation on blood agar plates and species-selective plates: (1) proximal leucite-reinforced ceramic crown, class II composite and enamel (n=11); and (2) class V restoration of CAC and composite, and enamel (n=17). Mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in the samples were distributed in three groups: 0, >0-1, and >1% of total bacteria. The surfaces with detected mutans streptococci were similarly distributed between the materials and enamel. The highest proportion of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli were observed on ceramic followed by composite and enamel. A higher proportion of lactobacilli, but not of mutans streptococci, was detected on enamel compared to CAC and composite. However, no significant differences were found between the surfaces. Conclusively, the materials investigated did not show different relative proportions of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in plaque, compared to enamel.

Cytotoxicity of a calcium aluminate cement in comparison with other dental cements and resin-based materials.

The objective of this study was to compare the cytotoxic effects of a calcium aluminate cement with several currently used direct restorative materials. Specimens of three composites (QuiXfil, Tetric Ceram, Filtek Supreme), one zinc phosphate cement (Harvard Cement), one glass ionomer cement (Ketac Molar), and one calcium aluminate cement (DoxaDent), were used fresh or after 7-days' preincubation in cell culture medium at 37 degrees C, pH 7.2. PVC strips for ISO 10993-5 cytotoxicity test were used as positive control and glass specimens as negative control. L-929 fibroblasts (5-ml aliquots, containing 3 x 10(4) cells/ml), cultivated in DMEM with 10% FCS, 1% glutamine, and 1% penicillin/streptomycin at 37 degrees C/5% CO2 and trypsinized, were exposed to the specimens for 72 h. The cells were harvested, centrifuged, and resuspended in 500 microl DMEM and then counted in 500 microl DMEM for 30 s with a flow cytometer at 488 nm. The analysis of variance comparing the six materials showed different influences on L-929 fibroblast cytotoxicity (p <0.0001). The cytotoxicity of all specimens diminished with increasing preincubation time (p <0.0001). Fresh DoxaDent exhibited the lowest cytotoxicity, followed by QuiXfil. Ketac Molar showed the highest cytotoxicity. After 7 days of preincubation, Harvard Cement and Filtek Supreme demonstrated more cytotoxicity than the other materials (p <0.005).

Interleukin-1 levels in gingival crevicular fluid adjacent to restorations of calcium aluminate cement and resin composite.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this clinical study was to intra-individually compare Class V restorations of a calcium aluminate cement (CAC), resin composite and enamel with respect to the adjacent levels of interleukin (IL)-1alpha, IL-1beta and IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra) in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). The hypothesis was that there are higher IL-1 levels adjacent to resin composite, compared with CAC and enamel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 15 subjects, at least one set of two Class V restorations with subgingival margins, one CAC and one universal hybrid resin composite, and one control surface of enamel were included. In a cross-sectional study and on days 0, 3 and 7 of an experimental gingivitis study, GCFs were collected with Periopaper for 30 s. The GCF concentrations of IL-1alpha, IL-1beta and IL-1ra were quantified with enzyme linked immunosorbent assays. RESULTS: Neither the cross-sectional study nor the experimental gingivitis study showed any significant differences in the levels of IL-1alpha, IL-1beta and IL-1ra between CAC, resin composite and enamel sites (p>0.05). In the cross-sectional study, low IL-1 concentrations were observed. The IL-1 levels increased significantly during the experimental gingivitis. CONCLUSION: Regardless of CAC or resin composite, the restorations per se did not affect the GCF levels of IL-1 and IL-1ra, neither at healthy gingiva, nor at initiation of plaque-related gingival inflammation.

Effect of a novel ceramic filling material on plaque formation and marginal gingiva.

The aim of this clinical investigation was to evaluate a novel ceramic (CF) filling material (DoxaDent) compared to resin composite (RC) and enamel in regard to plaque formation and gingival inflammation. The CF material is inorganic, non-metallic, and contains calcium aluminate, silicate, and water. To make intra-individual comparisons possible, each participant had at least one set of three test surfaces: two Class V restorations with subgingival cervical margins (one of the novel CF material and one of a hybrid RC) and one non-filled enamel surface (E). The amounts of plaque, gingival crevicular fluid, and clinical signs of gingival inflammation were intra-individually compared in 20 sets of the three test surfaces. In a cross-sectional study (CSS), the effect of oral hygiene on plaque formation and gingivitis around the surfaces was evaluated. In a following 10-day experimental gingivitis study (EGS), plaque formation and the induction of gingivitis during refrain from oral hygiene was compared. In the CSS, no significant differences were found between the surfaces in terms of amount of plaque and degree of gingival inflammation. At the end of the EGS the restorative materials showed a significantly higher amount of plaque (CF versus E, P = 0.014; RC versus E, P = 0.034), but no significant differences were found in degree of gingival inflammation. In condusion, the ceramic filling material was comparable to RC regarding plaque formation and gingival inflammation with customary oral hygiene. With neglected oral hygiene, significantly less plaque growth and a non-significant tendency toward lower amounts of gingival crevicular fluid were observed on enamel surfaces.