Article

Remineralization of early caries by a nano-hydroxyapatite dentifrice.

Department of Comprehensive Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.
The Journal of clinical dentistry 01/2011; 22(5):139-43.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this randomized, double-blind, crossover, in situ study was to evaluate the efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite (nHAP) dentifrices on caries remineralization and demineralization inhibition.
Three demineralized enamel blocks (A,B,C) and one healthy block (D), cut from each of 30 molars, were exposed respectively to dentifrices of A) 5% nHAP, B) 10% nHAP, C) 1100 ppm fluoride, and D) 10% nHAP via an intra-oral appliance worn by 30 adults in this four-phase study lasting 28 days per phase. Baseline and post-test mineral loss (delta Z) and lesion depth (LD) were quantified using microradiography.
Pair-wise comparison (baseline versus test) demonstrated significant (p < 0.001) reductions in delta Z and LD in A, B, and C. ANOVA showed no significant differences among the three products in percent mineral gain. No demineralization occurred in the sound enamel specimens exposed intra-orally while using 10% nHAP.
nHAP dentifrice caused remineralization comparable to a fluoride dentifrice, and inhibited caries development, thus suggesting that an nHAP dentifrice can be an effective alternative to fluoride toothpaste.

13 Followers
 · 
922 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This is a review of the latest scientific advances in technologies for effective management of initial (non-cavitated) caries lesions. The increasing emphasis on preventive and minimal intervention dentistry coupled with the established higher prevalence of non-cavitated caries compared to cavitated tooth surfaces is encouraging nonsurgical management of early caries among the practicing dentists. Thus, there is need for effective treatment strategies to facilitate non-operative care of initial caries lesions (remineralization). The new strategies should either facilitate fluoride action, work better than or synergistically with fluoride to provide a fuller remineralization of the lesions. An overview of new developments shows encouraging number of scientifically sound therapies with promising potential to be efficacious. However, there is shortage of strong clinical evidence generated through randomized clinical trials to support the efficacy and effectiveness of these new technologies. Devices with high validity and accuracy to measure and monitor remineralization are also needed to enable clinical data collection to validate effectiveness of these therapies.
    04/2015; 2(2). DOI:10.1007/s40496-015-0048-9
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nano-hydroxyapatite (NHA) has been used for regeneration of osseous defects. Calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement is also used for various dental treatments. This trial compared the efficacy of NHA and CEM cement for direct pulp capping (DPC) of sound primary teeth. In this randomized clinical trial with split-mouth design, after attaining informed consent, 20 sound primary canines scheduled for orthodontic extraction, were selected. After mechanical pulp exposure, the exposed site was capped with either NHA or CEM cement and then immediately restored with glass-ionomer and resin composite. The teeth were extracted after two months and examined histologically. Parameters of hard tissue bridge (HTB) formation, its type and quality as well as pulpal inflammation scores were compared between the two experimental groups. The data were analyzed using the Mann Whitney U and Fisher's exact test. The level of significance was set at 0.001. All CEM specimens showed inflammation score of 0 (less than 10%). However, in NHA group, inflammation scores of 0 (less than 10%), 1 (10%-30%) and 2 (30%-50%) were observed in 2 (20%), 4 (40%) and 4 (40%) specimens, respectively (P<0.001). HTB was formed in all CEM specimens while it was developed in 2 specimens of NHA (20%; P<0.001). All CEM specimens showed normal pulp; only two cases in NHA group (20%) demonstrated uninflamed normal pulp. CEM cement was superior to NHA as a DPC agent in terms of HTB formation and pulp inflammation scores. It is a suitable material for the DPC of primary teeth.
    01/2015; 10(2):107-11.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare dentin tubule occlusion by dentifrices containing either nanohydroxyapatite (10%nHAP and 15%nHAP), sodium monofluorophosphate (Na-MFP) or NovaMin (NovaMin). All 80 participants wore four intraoral appliances bearing dentin blocks while using one of the four test dentifrices (n = 20/dentifrice) twice daily for 14 days. The four appliances were removed in pairs after 7 and 14 days. One treated block from each of the test periods (7 and 14 days) and their untreated controls were examined with SEM to determine the level of tubule occlusion. The remaining two treated blocks and their controls were used to determine tubule permeability to dye solution. Effectiveness was compared statistically (ANOVA/Tukey's) based on % area covered by deposited precipitate layer (%DPL), % dye penetration inhibition (%DPI) and percentage of fully-open (%FOT), partially-occluded (%POT) and completely-occluded (%COT) tubules in each block calculated relative to the number of tubules in their control blocks. SEM showed increased %COT and %DPL overtime. After 7 and 14 days, %COT, %POT, %DPL and %DPI were significantly lower with Na-MFP when compared to 10%nHAP (P < 0.01), NovaMin (P < 0.05) and 15%nHAP (P < 0.001), the three of which were not significantly different from each other in those four variables. A reverse trend was observed with %FOT (P < 0.001). Within the same dentifrice, no difference in %COT, %POT, %FOT, %DPI and %DPL after 7 and 14 days, except with Na-MFP in which %DPL significantly (P< 0.05) increased with usage. In conclusion, nanohydroxyapatite-containing and NovaMin-containing toothpastes showed equal and more effectiveness in occluding dentin tubules than Na-MFP toothpaste.
    American journal of dentistry 02/2015; 28(1):33-9. · 1.06 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
781 Downloads
Available from
May 15, 2014