Emerging technologies for the prevention of dental caries. Are current methods of prevention sufficient for the high risk patient?

Fluorides and chlorhexidine are technologies that are 65 and 40 years old, respectively. This overview argues that current methods of caries prevention are not effective for the high caries risk patient. In this review examples, arguments and recommendations are provided to address the high caries risk patient that include: failure of comprehensive chemical modalities treatments to address the high caries risk patient; ecological alteration - would this be an effective approach?; and biomaterials and oral microbiome research to address the high caries risk patient.

CCR5 Down-regulates Osteoclast Function in Orthodontic Tooth Movement

During orthodontic tooth movement, there is local production of chemokines and an influx of leukocytes into the periodontium. CCL5 plays an important role in osteoclast recruitment and activation. This study aimed to investigate whether the CCR5-receptor influences these events and, consequently, orthodontic tooth movement. An orthodontic appliance was placed in wild-type mice (WT) and CCR5-deficient mice (CCR5(-/-)). The expression of mediators involved in bone remodeling was evaluated in periodontal tissues by Real-time PCR. The number of TRAP-positive osteoclasts and the expression of cathepsin K, RANKL, and MMP13 were significantly higher in CCR5(-/-). Meanwhile, the expression of two osteoblastic differentiation markers, RUNX2 and osteocalcin, and that of bone resorption regulators, IL-10 and OPG, were lower in CCR5(-/-). Analysis of the data also showed that CCR5(-/-) exhibited a greater amount of tooth movement after 7 days of mechanical loading. The results suggested that CCR5 might be a down-regulator of alveolar bone resorption during orthodontic movement.

Influence of Genetic Background on Fluoride Metabolism in Mice

A/J and 129P3/J mouse strains have different susceptibilities to dental fluorosis, due to their genetic backgrounds. This study tested whether these differences are due to variations in water intake and/or F metabolism. A/J (susceptible to dental fluorosis) and 129P3/J mice (resistant) received drinking water containing 0, 10, or 50 ppm F. Weekly F intake, excretion and retention, and terminal plasma and femur F levels were determined. Dental fluorosis was evaluated clinically and by quantitative fluorescence (QF). Data were tested by two-way ANOVA. Although F intakes by the strains were similar, excretion by A/J mice was significantly higher due to greater urinary F excretion, which resulted in lower plasma and femur F levels. Compared with 129P3/J mice given 50 ppm F, significantly higher QF scores were recorded for A/J mice. In conclusion, these strains differ with respect to several features of F metabolism, and amelogenesis in the 129P3/J strain seems to be unaffected by high F exposure.

Effect of sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at the same concentration and different pH on in vitro erosion

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effects 0.5% and 1% sodium, amine and stannous fluoride at different pH on enamel erosion in vitro. Methods: Bovine enamel samples were submitted to a cyclic de- and remineralisation for 3 days. Each day, the samples were exposed for 120 min to pooled human saliva and subsequently treated with one of the fluoride solutions for 3 min: amine fluoride (AmF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), sodium fluoride (NaF, 0.5% and 1% F(-)), each at pH 3.9 and 7.0, and stannous fluoride (SnF(2), 0.5% and 1% F-), at pH: 3.9. Additionally, two groups were treated with fluoride-free placebo solutions (pH: 3.9 and 7.0) and one group served as control (no fluoridation). Ten specimens each group were inserted in a so-called artificial mouth and eroded six times daily with hydrochloric acid (pH 2.6) for 90 s each intermitted by exposure to artificial saliva (1 h). After 3 days, enamel loss was analyzed profilometrically and evaluated statistically by ANOVA. Results: Only the acidic 0.5% and 1% SnF(2) and 1% AmF solutions were able to reduce erosive enamel loss significantly, while all other solutions and placebos did not differ significantly from the control. Between the acidic SnF(2) and the 1% AmF solutions no significant differences could be detected. Conclusion: At the same concentrations, acidic SnF(2) and AmF may be more effective than NaF to protect enamel against erosion. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.