Comparison of three methods for monitoring dentin erosion progression

Abstract Background: Clinical assessment and monitoring of dental erosion in vivo is challenging, although a number of clinical indices have been proposed but these are unlikely to be sensitive enough to quantify erosion with sufficient sensitivity to allow comparison of different therapies. In this respect, some of the techniques predominantly employed for the assessment of dental caries such as Quantitative light- induced fluorescence (QLF) and Optical coherence tomography (OCT) may also have utility for the assessment for erosion both in vivo and in vitro. The aim of the present study was to test three techniques (QLF, OCT and SMH) for the assessment of dentine erosion in a product testing model, using dentifrices to reduce erosion susceptibility. Dentine erosion was evaluated comparing the methods. Methods: Human dentine specimens were treated with one of two dentifrice slurries or mineral water (control group), followed by an erosive challenge and storage overnight in artificial saliva. These procedures were performed over 5 days. The following two dentifrices were tested: Duraphat™ 5000 (5000ppm Sodium Fluoride) and Colgate Sensitive Pro-Relief™ (8% arginine plus calcium carbonate and 1450ppm Fluoride). All groups showed a progressivedecrease in SMH and increase in scattering for OCT (P<0.05) indicating mineral loss. Results: The two dentifrice groups demonstrated significantly less softening than the control group (P0.05). Conclusion: SMH and OCT techniques were able to detect a significant protective effect against in vitro erosion whensamples were pre-treated with either dentifrice formulation. Dentifrices containing high concentrations of fluoride andarginine associated with calcium carbonate and fluoride have a protective effect against dentinal erosion.