Formulations of desensitizing toothpastes for dentin hypersensitivity: a scoping review

This study aimed to review evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to describe: 1) the active ingredients and desensitizing toothpaste brands; 2) the evaluation of these active ingredients over time, and 3) the fluoride and abrasive content in the formulations designed to treat dentin hype...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of applied oral science Vol. 30; p. e20210410
Main Authors Martins, Carolina Castro, Riva, John Joseph, Firmino, Ramon Targino, Schünemann, Holger Jens
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Brazil Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP 01.01.2022
University of São Paulo
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This study aimed to review evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to describe: 1) the active ingredients and desensitizing toothpaste brands; 2) the evaluation of these active ingredients over time, and 3) the fluoride and abrasive content in the formulations designed to treat dentin hypersensitivity (DH). In total, 138 RCTs and their tested toothpastes were included. Searches were updated up to August 19, 2021. Formulations, reported brands, active ingredients over time, and type of fluoride (ionizable or ionic fluoride) and abrasive (calcium or silica-based) were analyzed (PROSPERO #CRD42018086815). Our trials assessed 368 toothpaste formulations, including 34 placebo (9%), 98 control toothpastes with fluoride (27%), and 236 (64%) with active ingredients to treat DH. We tested the following active ingredients: potassium compounds (n=68, 19%), calcium sodium phosphosilicate (CSP) (n=37, 10%), strontium compounds (n=28, 8%), arginine (n=29, 8%), stannous fluoride (SnF2) (n=21, 6%), hydroxyapatite (n=9, 2%), potassium combined with another active ingredient (n=19, 5%), inorganic salt compounds (n=11, 3%), citrate (n=5, 1%), formaldehyde (n=3, 1%), herbal (n=4, 1%), copolymer (n=1, 0.5%), and trichlorophosphate (TCP) (n=1, 0.5%). The number of toothpaste formulations increased since 1968, with the greatest increment after 2010. Most toothpastes described their type of fluoride as sodium monofluorphosphate (MFP) (n=105, 29%) and NaF (n=82, 22%), with silica-based (n=84, 23%) and calcium-based (n=64, 17%) abrasives. Patients and dentists enjoy an increasing number of brands and active ingredients to decide what desensitizing toothpaste to use. The most common types of fluoride are MFP and NaF.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
Authors’ contributions
The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest regarding the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
Martins, Carolina Castro: Conceptualization (Lead), Data curation (Lead), Formal analysis (Lead), Funding acquisition (Lead), Investigation (Lead), Methodology (Lead). Project administration (Lead), Resources (Lead), Software (Lead), Supervision (Lead), Validation (Lead), Visualization (Lead), Writing – original draft (Lead), Writing – review & editing (Lead); Riva, John Joseph: Conceptualization (Equal), Data curation (Equal), Formal analysis (Equal), Methodology (Equal), Writing – review & editing (Equal); Firmino, Ramon Targino: Data curation (Equal), Formal analysis (Equal), Investigation (Equal), Methodology (Equal), Writing – review & editing (Equal); Schünemann, Holger Jens: Conceptualization (Lead), Formal analysis (Equal), Funding acquisition (Equal), Investigation (Equal), Methodology (Equal), Project administration (Equal), Writing – review & editing (Equal).
ISSN:1678-7757
1678-7765
1678-7765
DOI:10.1590/1678-7757-2021-0410