2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2009.10.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of fermented milk containing probiotic on dental enamel and biofilm: In situ study

Abstract: It was concluded that all treatment decreased the pH of dental biofilm and promoted demineralisation of the enamel, although fermented milk B presented the lowest EPS content and percentage change and integrated loss of surface hardness. More studies should be developed to evaluate the action of probiotics on the bacterial activity and its interference on demineralisation, once the literature has been showing probiotics as a promissory caries reducing agent.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
11
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…1 a) and selected by a surface hardness (SH) test ( fig. 1 b) of the total of blocks and the trust interval [Lodi et al, 2010], and were then randomized (320.0-380.0 kgf/mm 2 ) into eight groups (n = 11 per group) that were subjected to mouth rinses containing: (a) no F or TMP (placebo), (b) 100 μg F/ml (100), (c) 225 μg F/ml (225), (d) 100 μg F/ml + 0.05% TMP (100 0.05%TMP), (e) 100 μg F/ml + 0.1% TMP (100 0.1%TMP), (f) 100 μg F/ml + 0.2% TMP (100 0.2%TMP), (g) 100 μg F/ml + 0.4% TMP (100 0.4%TMP), and (h) 100 μg F/ml + 0.6% TMP (100 0.6%TMP). The enamel blocks were subjected to a pH cycling series and treated with mouth rinses twice a day.…”
Section: Experimental Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 a) and selected by a surface hardness (SH) test ( fig. 1 b) of the total of blocks and the trust interval [Lodi et al, 2010], and were then randomized (320.0-380.0 kgf/mm 2 ) into eight groups (n = 11 per group) that were subjected to mouth rinses containing: (a) no F or TMP (placebo), (b) 100 μg F/ml (100), (c) 225 μg F/ml (225), (d) 100 μg F/ml + 0.05% TMP (100 0.05%TMP), (e) 100 μg F/ml + 0.1% TMP (100 0.1%TMP), (f) 100 μg F/ml + 0.2% TMP (100 0.2%TMP), (g) 100 μg F/ml + 0.4% TMP (100 0.4%TMP), and (h) 100 μg F/ml + 0.6% TMP (100 0.6%TMP). The enamel blocks were subjected to a pH cycling series and treated with mouth rinses twice a day.…”
Section: Experimental Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Enamel bovine blocks were prepared, polished, and selected as described by Lodi et al 11 The baseline (SMHi) and final (SMHf) enamel surface microhardness measurements was performed. 14 The percentage change in SMH (%SMH) was calculated as follows: %SMH = 100 (SMHf − SMHi)/SMHi.…”
Section: Enamel Block Preparation and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ten healthy volunteers were selected on the basis of the criteria defined in previous studies. 11,16 The in situ experiment involved a randomized double-blind crossover design performed in 3 phases with 20% sucrose solution (control treatment), fermented milk 1 (treatment A), and fermented milk 2 (treatment B). Each participant wore an acrylic palatal device.…”
Section: In Situ Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Probiotics are defined by The Food Agricultural Organization (FAO)/World Health Organization (WHO) as live microorganisms, which when administered in adequate amounts (in food or as a dietary supplement), confer a health benefit on the host (improving microbiological balance in intestinal tract) 1,2 . The most commonly‐used strains belong to the genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium , 3 which are also commonly found in the oral cavity 4 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%