Fluoride concentration in saliva and biofilm fluid following the application of three fluoride varnishes

L. Al Dehailan, Frank Lippert, C. González-Cabezas, G. J. Eckert, Esperanza Martinez Mier

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective Most of the commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) have not been evaluated for their cariostatic properties. Consequently, the aim of this in vivo study was to investigate intra-oral fluoride retention and clearance patterns from three different FV. Methods Eighteen subjects (7–11 years) participated in a laboratory analyst-blinded, randomized, crossover study comparing the ability of 5% sodium fluoride varnishes (CavityShield-CS, Enamel Pro-EP, Vanish-V) to enhance fluoride concentrations in biofilm fluid, centrifuged and whole saliva over a period of 48 h after a single FV application. Results Similar fluoride concentration × time patterns were noted for all investigated FV and studied variables, with the highest fluoride concentrations observed for the first biological sample collected after FV application (30 min). Mean ± SE (area under fluoride clearance curve) values were (μg F/g or ml × min): biofilm fluid − CS (472 ± 191), EP (423 ± 75), V (1264 ± 279); centrifuged saliva − CS (42 ± 7), EP (19 ± 3), V (41 ± 8); whole saliva − CS (68 ± 11), EP (64 ± 10), V (60 ± 7). V delivered more fluoride to biofilm fluid than CS (p = 0.0116) and EP (p = 0.0065), which did not differ (p = 0.27). For centrifuged saliva, CS and V were not significantly different (p = 0.86), but resulted in higher fluoride retention than EP (p < 0.0008). No significant differences among FV were observed for whole saliva (p = 0.79). Conclusion The present study has shown that FV vary in their ability to deliver fluoride intra-orally potentially related to formulation differences. To what extent the present findings relate to clinical efficacy remains, however, to be determined. Clinical significance Clinical research that investigates fluoride release patterns into saliva and biofilm fluid from different FV products is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate different FV formulations for their efficacy in order to help clinicians make better evidence based treatment choices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)87-93
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Dentistry
Volume60
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Fingerprint

Topical Fluorides
Biofilms
Fluorides
Saliva
Sodium Fluoride
Dental Enamel
Research
Cross-Over Studies

Keywords

  • Biofilm fluid
  • Caries
  • Fluoride varnish
  • Saliva

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Fluoride concentration in saliva and biofilm fluid following the application of three fluoride varnishes. / Al Dehailan, L.; Lippert, Frank; González-Cabezas, C.; Eckert, G. J.; Martinez Mier, Esperanza.

In: Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 60, 01.05.2017, p. 87-93.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{298506ae443e404282bc3f44f9558eed,
title = "Fluoride concentration in saliva and biofilm fluid following the application of three fluoride varnishes",
abstract = "Objective Most of the commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) have not been evaluated for their cariostatic properties. Consequently, the aim of this in vivo study was to investigate intra-oral fluoride retention and clearance patterns from three different FV. Methods Eighteen subjects (7–11 years) participated in a laboratory analyst-blinded, randomized, crossover study comparing the ability of 5{\%} sodium fluoride varnishes (CavityShield-CS, Enamel Pro-EP, Vanish-V) to enhance fluoride concentrations in biofilm fluid, centrifuged and whole saliva over a period of 48 h after a single FV application. Results Similar fluoride concentration × time patterns were noted for all investigated FV and studied variables, with the highest fluoride concentrations observed for the first biological sample collected after FV application (30 min). Mean ± SE (area under fluoride clearance curve) values were (μg F/g or ml × min): biofilm fluid − CS (472 ± 191), EP (423 ± 75), V (1264 ± 279); centrifuged saliva − CS (42 ± 7), EP (19 ± 3), V (41 ± 8); whole saliva − CS (68 ± 11), EP (64 ± 10), V (60 ± 7). V delivered more fluoride to biofilm fluid than CS (p = 0.0116) and EP (p = 0.0065), which did not differ (p = 0.27). For centrifuged saliva, CS and V were not significantly different (p = 0.86), but resulted in higher fluoride retention than EP (p < 0.0008). No significant differences among FV were observed for whole saliva (p = 0.79). Conclusion The present study has shown that FV vary in their ability to deliver fluoride intra-orally potentially related to formulation differences. To what extent the present findings relate to clinical efficacy remains, however, to be determined. Clinical significance Clinical research that investigates fluoride release patterns into saliva and biofilm fluid from different FV products is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate different FV formulations for their efficacy in order to help clinicians make better evidence based treatment choices.",
keywords = "Biofilm fluid, Caries, Fluoride varnish, Saliva",
author = "{Al Dehailan}, L. and Frank Lippert and C. Gonz{\'a}lez-Cabezas and Eckert, {G. J.} and {Martinez Mier}, Esperanza",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jdent.2017.03.005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "60",
pages = "87--93",
journal = "Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0300-5712",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fluoride concentration in saliva and biofilm fluid following the application of three fluoride varnishes

AU - Al Dehailan, L.

AU - Lippert, Frank

AU - González-Cabezas, C.

AU - Eckert, G. J.

AU - Martinez Mier, Esperanza

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Objective Most of the commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) have not been evaluated for their cariostatic properties. Consequently, the aim of this in vivo study was to investigate intra-oral fluoride retention and clearance patterns from three different FV. Methods Eighteen subjects (7–11 years) participated in a laboratory analyst-blinded, randomized, crossover study comparing the ability of 5% sodium fluoride varnishes (CavityShield-CS, Enamel Pro-EP, Vanish-V) to enhance fluoride concentrations in biofilm fluid, centrifuged and whole saliva over a period of 48 h after a single FV application. Results Similar fluoride concentration × time patterns were noted for all investigated FV and studied variables, with the highest fluoride concentrations observed for the first biological sample collected after FV application (30 min). Mean ± SE (area under fluoride clearance curve) values were (μg F/g or ml × min): biofilm fluid − CS (472 ± 191), EP (423 ± 75), V (1264 ± 279); centrifuged saliva − CS (42 ± 7), EP (19 ± 3), V (41 ± 8); whole saliva − CS (68 ± 11), EP (64 ± 10), V (60 ± 7). V delivered more fluoride to biofilm fluid than CS (p = 0.0116) and EP (p = 0.0065), which did not differ (p = 0.27). For centrifuged saliva, CS and V were not significantly different (p = 0.86), but resulted in higher fluoride retention than EP (p < 0.0008). No significant differences among FV were observed for whole saliva (p = 0.79). Conclusion The present study has shown that FV vary in their ability to deliver fluoride intra-orally potentially related to formulation differences. To what extent the present findings relate to clinical efficacy remains, however, to be determined. Clinical significance Clinical research that investigates fluoride release patterns into saliva and biofilm fluid from different FV products is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate different FV formulations for their efficacy in order to help clinicians make better evidence based treatment choices.

AB - Objective Most of the commercially available fluoride varnishes (FV) have not been evaluated for their cariostatic properties. Consequently, the aim of this in vivo study was to investigate intra-oral fluoride retention and clearance patterns from three different FV. Methods Eighteen subjects (7–11 years) participated in a laboratory analyst-blinded, randomized, crossover study comparing the ability of 5% sodium fluoride varnishes (CavityShield-CS, Enamel Pro-EP, Vanish-V) to enhance fluoride concentrations in biofilm fluid, centrifuged and whole saliva over a period of 48 h after a single FV application. Results Similar fluoride concentration × time patterns were noted for all investigated FV and studied variables, with the highest fluoride concentrations observed for the first biological sample collected after FV application (30 min). Mean ± SE (area under fluoride clearance curve) values were (μg F/g or ml × min): biofilm fluid − CS (472 ± 191), EP (423 ± 75), V (1264 ± 279); centrifuged saliva − CS (42 ± 7), EP (19 ± 3), V (41 ± 8); whole saliva − CS (68 ± 11), EP (64 ± 10), V (60 ± 7). V delivered more fluoride to biofilm fluid than CS (p = 0.0116) and EP (p = 0.0065), which did not differ (p = 0.27). For centrifuged saliva, CS and V were not significantly different (p = 0.86), but resulted in higher fluoride retention than EP (p < 0.0008). No significant differences among FV were observed for whole saliva (p = 0.79). Conclusion The present study has shown that FV vary in their ability to deliver fluoride intra-orally potentially related to formulation differences. To what extent the present findings relate to clinical efficacy remains, however, to be determined. Clinical significance Clinical research that investigates fluoride release patterns into saliva and biofilm fluid from different FV products is insufficient. More research is needed to investigate different FV formulations for their efficacy in order to help clinicians make better evidence based treatment choices.

KW - Biofilm fluid

KW - Caries

KW - Fluoride varnish

KW - Saliva

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016470960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016470960&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.03.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.03.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 28322885

AN - SCOPUS:85016470960

VL - 60

SP - 87

EP - 93

JO - Journal of Dentistry

JF - Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0300-5712

ER -