Effect of arginine-fluoride varnish on preventing enamel erosion by paediatric liquid medicaments.
Arginine
Erosive wear
Fluoride
Paediatric liquid medicaments
Varnish
Journal
BMC oral health
ISSN: 1472-6831
Titre abrégé: BMC Oral Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088684
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 11 2023
20 11 2023
Historique:
received:
11
08
2023
accepted:
03
11
2023
medline:
22
11
2023
pubmed:
21
11
2023
entrez:
21
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The study objective was to examine the effect of arginine-sodium fluoride (Arg-NaF) varnish on preventing enamel erosion by acidic paediatric liquid medicaments (PLM). The treatment groups were: 1) 2% Arg-NaF; 2) 4% Arg-NaF; 3) 8% Arg-NaF; 4) NaF; 5) MI (CPP-ACFP) varnishes; and 6) no varnish. The pH of PLM (paracetamol and chlorpheniramine) was measured at baseline and after immersing the Perspex® blocks coated with varnishes at 0 min, 30 min, 1 h, and 4 h. Seventy-two enamel specimens (n = 72) were randomly divided into 2 groups by PLM and further by treatment groups. Then, the specimens were pre-treated with varnishes and subjected to erosive cycles (5 min, 2×/day for 4 days) by PLM. After each erosive challenge, the specimens were stored in artificial saliva. At baseline and after 4 days, the specimens were assessed for surface roughness (Ra) using 2D-surface profilometric analysis (SPA) and atomic force microscopy (AFM). Additionally, the Ca/P ratio was determined using scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Paired samples dependent t-test, 1-way ANOVA and 2-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to analyse data with the level of significance set at p < 0.05. The pH of PLM with 8% Arg-NaF was significantly higher than the other groups at 30 min and 4 h (p < 0.05). With paracetamol, no significant difference was observed between the baseline and post-erosive cycle measured enamel Ra (by SPA/AFM) and Ca/P ratio for all treatment groups (p > 0.05). The Ra determined by AFM, at the post-erosive cycle with chlorpheniramine, when treated with 4 and 8% Arg-NaF was significantly lower than the other groups (p < 0.05); except CPP-ACFP (p > 0.05). With the chlorpheniramine post-erosive cycle, the Ca/P ratio for 4, 8% Arg-NaF and CPP-ACFP treated specimens was significantly higher than the baseline Ca/P (p < 0.05). The 4%/8% Arg-NaF and MI varnish® application exhibit an enhanced preventive effect against low pH (pH < 3.0) PLM-mediated enamel erosive challenges compared to 5% NaF varnish.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The study objective was to examine the effect of arginine-sodium fluoride (Arg-NaF) varnish on preventing enamel erosion by acidic paediatric liquid medicaments (PLM).
METHODS
The treatment groups were: 1) 2% Arg-NaF; 2) 4% Arg-NaF; 3) 8% Arg-NaF; 4) NaF; 5) MI (CPP-ACFP) varnishes; and 6) no varnish. The pH of PLM (paracetamol and chlorpheniramine) was measured at baseline and after immersing the Perspex® blocks coated with varnishes at 0 min, 30 min, 1 h, and 4 h. Seventy-two enamel specimens (n = 72) were randomly divided into 2 groups by PLM and further by treatment groups. Then, the specimens were pre-treated with varnishes and subjected to erosive cycles (5 min, 2×/day for 4 days) by PLM. After each erosive challenge, the specimens were stored in artificial saliva. At baseline and after 4 days, the specimens were assessed for surface roughness (Ra) using 2D-surface profilometric analysis (SPA) and atomic force microscopy (AFM). Additionally, the Ca/P ratio was determined using scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Paired samples dependent t-test, 1-way ANOVA and 2-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to analyse data with the level of significance set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS
The pH of PLM with 8% Arg-NaF was significantly higher than the other groups at 30 min and 4 h (p < 0.05). With paracetamol, no significant difference was observed between the baseline and post-erosive cycle measured enamel Ra (by SPA/AFM) and Ca/P ratio for all treatment groups (p > 0.05). The Ra determined by AFM, at the post-erosive cycle with chlorpheniramine, when treated with 4 and 8% Arg-NaF was significantly lower than the other groups (p < 0.05); except CPP-ACFP (p > 0.05). With the chlorpheniramine post-erosive cycle, the Ca/P ratio for 4, 8% Arg-NaF and CPP-ACFP treated specimens was significantly higher than the baseline Ca/P (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The 4%/8% Arg-NaF and MI varnish® application exhibit an enhanced preventive effect against low pH (pH < 3.0) PLM-mediated enamel erosive challenges compared to 5% NaF varnish.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37985984
doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-03621-8
pii: 10.1186/s12903-023-03621-8
pmc: PMC10662501
doi:
Substances chimiques
Acetaminophen
362O9ITL9D
Chlorpheniramine
3U6IO1965U
Fluorides
Q80VPU408O
Fluorides, Topical
0
Sodium Fluoride
8ZYQ1474W7
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
892Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Polymers (Basel). 2020 Dec 16;12(12):
pubmed: 33339152
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 May;111(5):498-501
pubmed: 9155808
J Dent. 2018 Sep;76:75-82
pubmed: 29935996
BMC Public Health. 2014 Jan 08;14:7
pubmed: 24397565
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2019 Dec;20(6):517-527
pubmed: 30762211
Braz Dent J. 2014 Jan-Feb;25(1):22-7
pubmed: 24789287
J Appl Oral Sci. 2009 Mar-Apr;17(2):75-86
pubmed: 19274390
Br Dent J. 2018 Mar 9;224(5):311-318
pubmed: 29495025
Caries Res. 2015;49(6):606-17
pubmed: 26536588
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2020 Sep;20(3):101470
pubmed: 32921383
Eur J Oral Sci. 2004 Aug;112(4):362-7
pubmed: 15279656
J Dent. 2021 May;108:103631
pubmed: 33711406
J Bacteriol. 2016 Sep 09;198(19):2651-61
pubmed: 27161116
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2018 Sep;18(3):203-217.e4
pubmed: 30077374
Caries Res. 2016;50(4):383-93
pubmed: 27403876
J Dent. 2020 Aug;99:103411
pubmed: 32585260
Protein Sci. 2015 May;24(5):752-61
pubmed: 25808204
Monogr Oral Sci. 2011;22:97-114
pubmed: 21701194
Br Dent J. 2018 Mar 9;224(5):364-370
pubmed: 29495027
J Dent Res. 2015 Feb;94(2):344-53
pubmed: 25477312
Dent J (Basel). 2017 May 11;5(2):
pubmed: 29563423
Aust Dent J. 2015 Mar;60(1):104-11
pubmed: 25721284
J Dent Res. 2017 Jul;96(8):924-930
pubmed: 28486080
J Dent. 2022 Jul;122:104096
pubmed: 35307476
Int J Paediatr Dent. 2018 Dec 19;:
pubmed: 30565784
Odontology. 2013 Jan;101(1):2-8
pubmed: 23224410
Monogr Oral Sci. 2021;29:80-90
pubmed: 33427222
J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(2):111-119
pubmed: 28439579
Aust Dent J. 2008 Sep;53(3):268-73
pubmed: 18782374
J Dent. 2021 Jan;104:103528
pubmed: 33188848
Caries Res. 2008;42(1):2-7
pubmed: 18042984
Sci Rep. 2017 Aug 3;7(1):7206
pubmed: 28775282
Dent Mater. 2020 Sep;36(9):1226-1240
pubmed: 32563521