pH and Erosive Potential of Commonly Used Oral Moisturizers

Delgado, Alex J.; Ólafsson, Vilhelm G.; Donovan, Terence E.

doi:10.1111/jopr.12324

Cited by 7 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies have concluded that there is a large variation in the pH values among the most common oral moisturizers on the market ( Table 1 ) and that there is a strong correlation between the pH values and the erosive potential of these products. 12 , 15 The data presented in this study show great variation in the composition and pH values among commercially available oral moisturizers. Several of the tested products contained citric acid or citric flavors, most likely to provide a pleasant taste.…”

mentioning

confidence: 74%

“…8 The critical pH of dentin was first reported by Hoppenbrouwers et al in 1987 at 6.7, 9 and it was confirmed 2 years later by Surmount et al 8 Several studies have reported the critical pH of dentin to be in a range of 6–6.9. 10 – 12 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the erosive potential relies not only on the pH of the product, but also the complex interplay of other ingredients may have a neutralizing effect; hence, tooth substance loss will not always occur. 12 , 15 For example, The addition of calcium into acidic lozenges has been shown to greatly reduce their erosive potential, as well as preventing demineralization of hydroxyapatite even though pH values drop below the critical pH for enamel for a short period of time. 18 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Acidic oral moisturizers with pH below 6.7 may be harmful to teeth depending on formulation: a short report

Delgado¹,

Ólafsson²

2017

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Xerostomia affects 30% of the population and manifests as a side effect of medications, systemic diseases, or cancer therapy. Oral moisturizers are prescribed to overcome the ailments of dry mouth and its symptoms. It is imperative that these products help to restore hyposalivation and that they do not present any secondary effect that can harm oral health. It has been shown in the literature that some oral moisturizers may have an erosive potential due to their acidic pH, which is below the critical pH of dentin and enamel. The purpose of this paper was to make clinicians aware of the erosive potential of these products and make recommendations to manufactures for future formulations avoiding acidic pH. For this reason, care should be taken to formulate these products with safe pH values for both enamel and root dentin which, based on specific formulation should be around 6.7 or higher.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 74%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acidic oral moisturizers with pH below 6.7 may be harmful to teeth depending on formulation: a short report

Delgado¹,

Ólafsson²

2017

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The pH of the foam mouthwash was 7.4 which is similar to Bioténe Oral Balance which also contains lactoperoxidase and has previously been shown to not cause enamel erosion. 24 The SEM images show that the biofilm was not uniformly developed over the surface but that the amount removed following a 5 s rinse with the foam mouthwash was greater than with saline. Increasing the exposure time to 30 s would most likely remove more of the formed biofilm as evidenced in the first part of the study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The antibacterial efficacy of a foam mouthwash and its ability to remove biofilms

Jones¹,

West²,

Nesmiyanov

et al. 2018

BDJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/AimsTo evaluate the antimicrobial activity of a newly developed foam mouthwash containing a modified lactoperoxidase system in vitro.Materials and methodsBiofilms of five bacterial species were developed on hydrophobic and hydrophilic surfaces whilst salivary-based biofilm was grown on tooth enamel. Each surface was exposed to the foam mouthwash or saline in vitro. Optical density and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to determine retention of the biofilm following 5 or 30 s exposure time.ResultsThe foam mouthwash was active against biofilms formed by S. aureus, K. rhizophila, M. thailandicus, E. coli, and C. violaceum and eliminated significant amount of biofilm from each surface; immature 4 h biofilm was less resistant than 24 h biofilm. A 30 s rinse showed best performance, with removal of up to 66% of biofilm from the hydrophilic surface. SEM imaging confirmed oral biofilm removal from the enamel surface after a 5 s rinse with the foam mouthwash.DiscussionFoam mouthwash demonstrated a significant impact on growing biofilm when compared against saline solution. Growing biofilms were more susceptible to the action of the foam mouthwash, which justifies after-meal use of the mouthwash when traditional dentifrices may not be accessible.ConclusionsFoam mouthwash can be a convenient on-the-go format of oral care products that can be used after meals or when needed to reduce the risk of biofilm-associated oral conditions.

show abstract

“…The heating of an antifungal drug (fluconazole) has been shown to significantly increase its ability to inhibit biofilm formation by C. albicans [ 25 , 26 ]. Generally, the pH of a substance changes depending on the temperature, but the pH of commercially available oral moisturizers varies greatly depending on the type of product [ 27 ]. Therefore, the storage temperature and pH of an oral moisturizer might influence its antifungal effect.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Storage Temperature and pH on the Antifungal Effects of Commercial Oral Moisturizers against Candida albicans and Candida glabrata

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives: Oral moisturizers have been used to treat dry mouth. This study aimed to investigate the effects of storage temperature and pH on the antifungal effects of oral moisturizers against Candida albicans and Candida glabrata. Materials and Methods: Thirty-one oral moisturizers and amphotericin B (AMPH-B) were stored at 25 and 37 °C for 1 week. Subsequently, they were added to cylindrical holes in 50% trypticase soy agar plates inoculated with C. albicans and C. glabrata (107 cells/ml). The antifungal effects were evaluated based on the sizes of the growth-inhibitory zones formed. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine the effects of storage temperature and pH on the growth-inhibitory zones. Results: Significant differences in the effects of storage temperature and pH of the moisturizers were observed against C. albicans and C. glabrata. The growth-inhibitory zones of samples stored at 37 °C and with neutral pH were significantly larger than those stored at 25 °C and with acidic pH, respectively. The sizes of the zones formed by most of the oral moisturizers were larger than those formed by AMPH-B (concentration, 0.63 µg/ml). Conclusion: The antifungal effects of oral moisturizers against C. albicans and C. glabrata were affected by their storage temperature and pH.

show abstract

pH and Erosive Potential of Commonly Used Oral Moisturizers

Cited by 7 publications

References 14 publications

Acidic oral moisturizers with pH below 6.7 may be harmful to teeth depending on formulation: a short report

Acidic oral moisturizers with pH below 6.7 may be harmful to teeth depending on formulation: a short report

The antibacterial efficacy of a foam mouthwash and its ability to remove biofilms

Effects of Storage Temperature and pH on the Antifungal Effects of Commercial Oral Moisturizers against Candida albicans and Candida glabrata

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About