Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of a specially formulated remineralizing toothpaste in controlling caries in a group of high risk, head and neck radiation patients. DESIGN: The study compares the performance of the remineralizing toothpaste with a leading conventional fluoride dentifrice using double-blind randomization. TEST PRODUCTS: The products compared both contain equivalent quantities of fluoride (1150 ppm). The remineralizing toothpaste also delivers soluble calcium and phosphate ions, the essential components of teeth. SUBJECTS: On completion, 50 subjects who received > 50 Gy of radiation to the head and neck. MEASUREMENTS: Examinations include coronal and root caries using the Pitts Diagnostic Criteria, salivary flow rate, plaque and gingival indices and microbiological counts over one year. RESULTS: At this point subjects are enrolled in the study at various phases. However, the current average for the net increment per month per subject is -0.12 (+/- 1.30) for coronal caries and 0.06 (+/- 0.73) for root caries in subjects using the remineralizing toothpaste and 0.53 (+/- 1.62) for coronal caries and 0.45 (+/- 0.98) for root caries in subjects using the conventional fluoride dentifrice. Non-parametric analysis of rank scores for net root surface increments/month was statistically significant (p = 0.02), suggesting lower net root surface increment/month for the remineralizing toothpaste relative to the conventional toothpaste. No significant differences were noted on coronal surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: The results to date indicate that the remineralizing toothpaste is significantly superior to the conventional fluoride dentifrice in preventing root caries in high risk patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Papas et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: