VADEMECUM
Transcription
VADEMECUM
VADEMECUM DENTAID’S MISSION Dentaid, founded in 1980, is a pioneer oral research company whose goal is to improve oral health throughout society, by providing the best scientifically-backed solutions to consumers around the globe. Our commitment to research and innovation and our strong working relationship with dental and pharmaceutical professionals and major European and American universities have contributed to our status as world-wide leaders. Advancing through research We are one of the few European laboratories specialised in the microbiological research of dental biofilms. By combining state-ofthe-art technology and highly qualified staff, we are able to consistently guarantee quality levels in all of our brands. 2 EUROPE Andorra Belgium Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Holland Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Ukraine United Kingdom In search of new challenges To cover the population’s oral hygiene needs, we are constantly working to innovate by creating new products and improving our existing ones. To innovate, our advanced facilities are exclusively devoted to research and development. Our business strategy is based on a strong commitment to continuous research and development of high quality, innovative products. Through this commitment, we have become what we are today: a multinational leader in oral health. AMERICA Chile Colombia Dominican Republic Guatemala Paraguay Peru Uruguay DENTAID is present in more than 50 countries ASIA Cambodja Iran Japan Kuwait Lebanon Myanmar Qatar Saudi Arabia UAE subsidiaries AFRICA Benin Burkina Faso Egypt Libya Morocco Mauritus Niger Senegal Togo Tunisie 3 TOOTHBRUSHES Toothbrushes Monotip Attack zone disrupts even the most resistant dental biofilm. Protective cap Keeps filaments together and in optimal conditions while isolating them from external contact. Filaments Made of end-rounded, textured Tynex® preventing damage to enamel and gum. Brushing surface Different formats for accessing interdental spaces in every situation. Brush head Small and rounded for easy brushing and better access to hard-to-reach areas. Handle Ergonomic and adaptable, can be bent to the form of your mouth. 4 TOOTHBRUSHES PERIO ULTRASOFT For gently cleaning delicate gums Specifically designed for cleaning fixed orthodontic appliances Very gentle cleaning for cases of extreme sensitivity Specific cleaning for periodontal treatments or wide spaces MEDIUM JUNIOR ACCESS MEDIUM SENSITIVE Small brush head with soft filaments ACCESS ORTHODONTIC ORTHODONTIC GINGIVAL ACCESS SOFT HARD Normal brush head with hard filaments Normal brush head with medium strength filaments Child-size brush head with soft filaments Small brush head with medium strength filaments For gently cleaning sensitive teeth Small brush head specifically designed for cleaning fixed orthodontic appliances SURGICAL SOFT Normal brush head with soft filaments Daily Care Extremely gentle cleaning after surgical interventions MONOTIP Complete For efficiently cleaning braces, prostheses and implants 5 CEPILLOS VITIS IMPLANT Innovation implant applied to implant hygiene The most complete and specialised product range for hygiene, care and protection of dental implants Cutting edge toothbrushes, designed specifically for disrupting oral biofilm around implants with the utmost precision, penetrate the peri-implant sulcus, to mechanically break up the biofilm, enhancing the effects of antimicrobial agents. situations • Small brush head that with soft Tynex® filaments efficiently reaches areas around implants that are normally hard to clean. • Provides easy access to lingual surfaces of the anterior and posterior sections of the dental arches. IMPLANT SULCULAR IMPLANT ANGULAR Special 6 • Small, rounded brush head for daily brushing, care and hygiene in people with dental implants. • Extra-soft Tynex® filaments provide gentle, but deep, cleaning of gums when mucogingival problems are present. • Small, narrow and linear brush head with soft Tynex® filaments arranged in two rows. • Specifically indicated for cleaning the gingival and/or peri-implant sulcus. Specifically designed for cleaning implants and prostheses IMPLANT MONOTIP IMPLANT BRUSH Small brush head for gently cleaning mouths with implants Specifically designed for cleaning implants, prostheses and braces • Small brush head. • Tynex® filaments arranged in a monotuft. • Designed specifically to access very small spaces that require maximum cleaning precision of implant-supported prostheses. DENTAL FLOSS & TAPE SOFT WAXED DENTAL FLOSS WAXED DENTAL TAPE WITH FUORIDE AND MINT WAXED DENTAL FLOSS dental floss & tape Waxed dental floss Easy-glide cleaning. Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque. Ideal for creating good flossing habits. • • • Waxed dental tape with fluoride and mint Cleaning that strengthens enamel. Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque. Fluoride strengthens enamel. Contains sodium fluoride. • • • • Soft waxed dental floss with fluoride and mint Gentle cleaning in people with braces, implants and prosthetics. Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque. Textured floss expands when in contact with saliva. Contains sodium fluoride. • • • • 7 WHITENING whitening Effectively whitens and prevents dental sensitivity Repairing and Whitening action - Fill irregular tooth surfaces. • Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles Natural tooth element that integrates and forms a protective, wash-resistant coating. - Repair tooth enamel, making surface smoother and brighter . - From a protective coating to prevent dental sensitivity. DENTAID technology nanorepair ® NEW Mouthwash 0,45% 0,0125% 1,10% 0,172% Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles Repair dental enamel for a smoother and brighter surface Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) Removes stains from the surface of tooth enamel and prevents their formation ✓ ✓ Tetrapotassium pyrophosphate Sodium tripolyphosphate Sodium hexametaphosphate Delay or prevent calculus formation: crystallization of bacterial plaque (oral biofilm). Remove stains and prevent their formation. ✓ ✓ Polishes and smoothes dental enamel without damaging it. Gives surface a smoother and brighter finish. Restores the natural shine of teeth. ✓ _ Perlite Presentations 8 Toothpaste 100ml 500ml CEPILLOS GINIGIVAL • • • • Reduces plaque (biofilm) build-up For delicate gums Reinforces enamel Protects gums Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel Permethol Promotes healthy gums Pro-vitamin B5 (Panthenol) Protects and gums Zinc lactate Increases the substantivity of CPC, lengthening its activity. Presentations VITIS GINGIVAL KIT · 30 ml VITIS gingival mouthwash · 15 ml VITIS gingival toothpaste · VITIS gingival toothbrush Toothpaste Mouthwash 0.05% 0.05% 1450ppm _____ 0.25% 0.1% 1.0% 0.5% 0.25% 0.14% 100ml 150ml/500ml REFERENCES: 1.García V, Rioboo M, Serrano J, Herrera D, SANZ M. Plaque Inhibitory Effect of a 0.05% Cetyl-Pyridinium Chloride Mouthrinse. Journal of Dental Research 2008; 87 (special issue). 2.Sanz M, Herrera D. Clinical and microbiological efficacy on an antimicrobial mouthrinse containing 0,05% CPC in patients with gingivitis. International Journal of Dental Hygiene (accepted sept 2010) 9 ORTHODONTIC • • • • • Reinforces enamel Keeps gums healthy Reduces plaque (biofilm) build-up Prevents bad breath Helps keep braces clean VITIS ORTHODONTIC KIT · 30 ml VITIS orthodontic mouthwash · 15 ml VITIS orthodontic toothpaste · VITIS orthodontic toothbrush Toothpaste Mouthwash Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation 0.05% 1450ppm 226ppm Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel Aloe Vera Promotes healthy gums 0.126% 0.05% Promotes healthy gums 0.10% 0.10% Allantoin Presentations 100ml REFERENCES: 10 0.05% 150ml/500ml VITIS orthodontic wax Creates a protective coating that protects against rubbing caused by orthodontic appliances. 2 units VITIS orthodontic tablets Prevent plaque buildup and bad odour. Get rid of stains from tea, coffee, smoking. Do not harm metallic parts of orthodontic appliances. 32 units 1. Herrera D, Pérez L, Escudero N, Alonso B, Serrano J, Martin C, Sanz M. Evaluation of Cetylpyridinium chloride. Formulations in orthodontic patients: Periodontal outcomes. Comunication at IADR Munich Sept 2009. 0,12% PERIO·AID 0,12% MOUTHWASH • Efficiently fights dental biofilm. • Helps maintain the health of your gums. • Before and after dental care PERIO·AID 0,12% GEL • For implant and periodontal maintenance. PERIO·AID 0,12% SPRAY • For hard-to-reach areas (tonsils, tongue dorsum) or in people with special needs. Mouthwash Spray Gel Chlorhexidine digluconate Efficiently fights dental biofilm 0.12% 0.12% 0.12% Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation 0.05% 0.05% _____ 150ml/500ml 5000ml 50ml 75ml Presentations 11 MAINTENANCE First scientifically endorsed formulation for oral biofilm control with superior efficacy NOT ALL CHLOREHXIDINE FORMULATIONS ARE ALIKE* PERIO·AID MAINTENANCE MOUTHWASH • Prevents the accumulation of dental biofilm. • After dental care. • Helps maintain the health of your gums. Mouthwash Chlorhexidine digluconate Efficiently fights dental biofilm 0.05% Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation 0.05% Presentations 12 150ml/500ml BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 Mucositis in Irradiated Cancer Patients: Effects of an Antiseptic Mouthrinse I. LANZ. S, , S. SANTOS, A. OxCONNOR, E. LANZ S, and M. SANZ, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain, Hospital 12 de octubre, Madrid, Spain. Mucositis in Irradiated Cancer Patients: Effects of an Antiseptic Mouthrinse. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010 Sep 1; 15 (5): e732-8 Objective: To assess the effects of a mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine (CHX, 0.12%) and cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC, 0.05%) and no alcohol, in irradiated cancer patients. Material and Methods: Consecutive patients, irradiated as part of the therapy of head-and-neck cancer, were selected. Patients were orally assessed with regards to the presence and degree of mucositis (0-4), plaque and gingival (dichotomous) indices, amount and pH of saliva, and presence of different micro-organisms, including Candida sp. after culturing of mucosa, tongue and subgingival samples. Patients were randomised to use, twice per day, a test or placebo mouthrinse, and were evaluated after 2 and 4 weeks. Groups were compared in the changes in outcome variables by means of non-parametric test, either chi-square for dichotomous variables in contingency tables, or Wilcoxon test. Results: A total of 36 consecutive patients (32 male and 4 female patients) were screened for inclusion. Among them, 31 patients completed the 2-weeks visit, and 26 the 4-weeks visit. Most patients developed mucositis in both groups, and no differences were detected between groups after 2 (p=0.35) or 4 weeks (p=0.69) or in the comparison 2-4 weeks (p=0.53). With regards to the degree of mucositis, no significant differences were detected, although the mean increase baseline-2 weeks was higher in the placebo group (1.81 versus 1.20). No differences were detected in other clinical variables, except a higher reduction baseline-2 weeks of plaque (p=0.06) and a lower level of gingival bleeding at 2 weeks (p=0.08), at sampled sites, both favoring the test group. The test group showed a higher reduction (p=0.09) in the amounts of Candida sp. baseline-4 weeks and 2 weeks-4 weeks in the mucosa sample. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the small sample size, this study suggests some improvements of clinical and microbiological parameters in patients irradiated for head-and-neck cancer. *Supported by Dentaid. 2 Differences in antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse formulations: An in vitro contact test and salivary bacterial counts study D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. Santacruz, S. Santos, M. Masdevall, M. Sanz: Differences in antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chorhexidine mouthrinse formulations: an in vitro contact test and salivary bacterial counts study. J. Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 307-314. Aim: To evaluate the in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinses. Material and Methods: The in vitro antimicrobial activity test consisted in a modified contact test where 20 selected bacterial species were tested during 1 min with each test product. After the contact, the inoculum was cultured, and the results were expressed in terms of survival/resistance and the percentage of survival as compared to a saline control. The in vivo test consisted of a double-blind, randomized, cross-over salivary bacterial counts study, 10 volunteers rinsed during 1 min with each tested product. Saliva samples were obtained before rinsing, and after 5 min, and 1, 3, 5 and 7 h. These samples were cultured both aerobically and anaerobically. Percentages of survival, in regard to baseline, were calculated for each time point. Comparisons among products were tested using ANOVA and selected paired t-test. Results: The in vitro contact test showed no survival in any tested species with CHX+CPC, while 3 species (L. casei, S. mitis and P. micros) were resistant to the other 3 products. CHX and CHX+NaF demonstrated additional resistant species (3 and 4 species, respectively). The in vivo salivary bacterial counts test showed higher reductions of CHX+CPC and CHX+ALC in aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, lasting for 5 h. Significant differences were detected at multiple time points, when these two products were compared both with the control and the other tested products. Conclusion: Important differences in activity, among 0.12% CHX products, were detected by both in vitro and in vivo tests. The formulation with alcohol was more active than those without alcohol, excepting the formulation with CHX+CPC, in which the reformulation and addition of CPC, not only compensate but rather increase the antimicrobial activity. *Supported by Dentaid. 3 Antimicrobial activity in saliva of four chlorhexidine mouthrinses D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. Santacruz, A. O’Connor, M. Sanz. Antimicrobial activity in saliva of four chlorhexidine mouthrinses. Periodoncia 2001;11 (3): 193-202 Objective. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the microbiological efficacy of different mouthrinses containing 0.12% chlorhexidine in different formulations, due to variations in the alcohol content, or due to the addition of other components (sodium fluoride, cetylpyridinium chloride). Patients and methods. 10 student volunteers with similar ages and oral health participated. Both the researcher and the laboratory were blind to the products studied. The design of the study was randomized, crossover with a one week washout period. After base evaluations and taking 1 ml non-stimulated saliva base samples, each subject rinsed with 15 ml of the product for the duration of 1 minute. New samples were taken at 5 min, 1, 3, 5, and 7 hours. Samples were sent to the laboratory, and were processed in two series, with aerobic (24 h), and anaerobic incubation (48 h). The products evaluated were: 0.12% chlorhexidine with alcohol (CLX + ALC); 0.12% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride without alcohol (CLX + CPC); 0.12% chlorhexidine and sodium fluoride without alcohol (CLX + NaF); 0.12% chlorhexidine without alcohol (CLX); and a saline solution control. The number of colony forming units (CFU) was determined, and the data were transformed into logarithms. Statistical comparisons were made using Student’s t test. Results. The reductions in aerobic CFUs were significant compared to the control for all of the products evaluated, except for CLX + NaF. The differences in anaerobic CFUs were significant compared to the control for all products, except for CLX + NaF. When comparing products, the best results were shown for CLX + ALC and for the CLX + CPC mouthrinse. Conclusions: The mouthrinses containing 0.12% chlorhexidine were effective in reducing salivary flora, but showed important differences in their activity depending on the composition. The entire composition of a mouthrinse significantly influences its effectiveness, independently of its active ingredient. *Supported by Dentaid. 4 Effect of different chlorhexidine formulations in mouthrinses on de novo plaque formation M. Quirynen, P. Avontroodt, W. Peeters, M. Pauwels, W. Coucke, D. Van Steenberghe. Effect of different chlorhexidine formulations in mouthrinses on de novo plaque formation. J Clin Periodontol 2001; 28: 1127-36 Background: Chlorhexidine (CHX) 0.2 % solution, still the golden standard as mouthrinse for the prevention of plaque formation and development of gingivitis, has some limited side-effects such as extrinsic tooth staining, poor taste, taste disturbance, sensitivity changes in tongue, pain, and the content of alcohol. These side effects led to the search of new formulations. Methods: In this double-blind, randomised, cross-over study, 16 young dental students with a healthy periodontium, abolished all means of mechanical plaque control during 4 experimental periods of 11 days (separated from each other by a washout period of 3 weeks). During each experimental period, they rinsed 2x daily with one of the following mouthrinses in a randomised order: CHX 0.2 % + alcohol (Corsodyl®), CHX 0.12% + alcohol (Perio·Aid®), CHX 0.12 % + sodium fluoride 0.05 % (Cariax Gingival®) and CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % (Perio·Aid®, new formulation). After 7 and 11 days of undisturbed plaque formation, clinical parameters were recorded, questionnaires completed and plaque samples (supragingivally and saliva) collected. Results: The CHX 0.12 % + alcohol and the CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % formulations were as efficient as the CHX 0.2 % mouthrinse in retarding de novo plaque formation (proven by clinical observations as well as by anaerobic and aerobic culture data), and always superior (p<0.001) to the CHX 0.12 % + sodium fluoride 0.05 % solution. The subjective ratings were in favour of the new CHX formulation when compared with the other CHX formulations, especially for taste (p<0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated the potential of a new CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % non-alcoholic formulation as an effective anti-plaque and anti-inflammatory agent with reduced unpleasant subjective side-effects. 5 Comparison of 2 chlorhexidine mouthwashes on plaque regrowth in vivo and dietary staining in vitro C. Mendieta, N. Vallcorba, A. Binney, M. Addy. Comparison of 2 chlorhexidine mouthwashes on plaque regrowth in vivo and dietary staining in vitro. J Clin Periodontol 1994; 21: 296-300 Until recently, the few available chlorhexidine mouthrinse products have been 0.2% formulations. However, concentrations of 0.12% chlorhexidine appear as effective as 0.2%, if the volume of the rinse is increased to 15 ml. Since the mere incorporation of chlorhexidine in a formulation does not guarantee availability of the antiseptic, it would seem reasonable to evaluate or compare all products. This is particularly the case when other ingredients, such as fluoride are added. The 1st study compared the effect of a 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse with a 0.12% chlorhexidine /0.022% sodium fluoride rinse for effects on plaque regrowth. The study was a 7-day, blind, randomised, 2-cell cross-over design with a baseline control run in period, in which 18 subjects participated. Both chlorhexidine products significantly reduced plaque compared to control but the chlorhexidine fluoride rinse was less effective than the chlorhexidine only rinse. The 2nd study assessed the propensity of the chlorhexidine rinses to induce dietary staining in vitro. For the chlorhexidine fluoride rinse, this was less than the other 0.12% rinse and a commonly used 0.2% product. The data in vivo and in vitro suggest reduced chlorhexidine availability from the chlorhexidine fluoride product which appears to cause some loss of efficacy. *Supported by Dentaid. 6 Efficacy of a gel dentifrice in the regrowth inhibition of supragingival bacterial plaque C. Mendieta, A. Ramírez, I. Conde, F. Matas, M. Comella, A. Quinteros, R. Puigmal. Efficacy of a gel dentifrice in the regrowth inhibition of supragingival bacterial 13 BIBLIOGRAPHY plaque. Periodoncia 1998 Vol. 8; (3) Fasc 2: 184-185 The goals of this investigation were: 1) to study the inhibitory effect on supragingival bacterial plaque growth of a gel containing 0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate (Gel A), and 2) to- compare this antiplaque effect with that produced by a placebo gel, identical to the previous one but without chlorhexidine digluconate (Gel B). This double blind randomized, crossover study with an intermediate washout period, was carried out on 20 volunteers. Supragingival bacterial plaque levels were assessed by using the Quigley-Hein (Turesky modified) plaque index (IP). At the start of each treatment period, supragingival bacterial plaque was completely removed (IP=0), and each subject was assigned either to treatment A (3 ml of Gel A), B (3 ml of Gel B) or C (10 ml of water, considered base). Each participant spread the gel or the water over their entire dentition for 1 min. The treatment was carried out 2 times / day for 7 days as their only method of oral hygiene. Before the crossover assignment, subjects carried out their regular oral hygiene for 72 hours. By the time the study was over, all participants had used all treatments A, B and C. The analysis between groups was carried out using the multifactor analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of significance was set at a=0.05. Gel A showed significant inhibition (p<0.001), when compared to base values (treatment C), on the regrowth of supragingival bacterial plaque. The effect of gel A was statistically superior (p<0.0001) to that of gel B on all surfaces assessed. Plaque index values for gel B were identical to base values (p>0.05). The inhibiting effect on plaque regrowth was variable depending on the surfaces assessed, with anterior teeth being 30% and posterior teeth being 24%. The effect of gel A was the highest (41%) in the middle of the lingual/palatine surface of the anterior teeth.*Supported by Dentaid. 7 Clinical evaluation of a mouthrinse in supportive periodontal care M.ESCRIBANO, S. MORANTE, I. GONZÁLEZ, D. HERRERA, and M. SANZ, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain. Clinical evaluation of a mouthrinse in supportive periodontal care. Journal of Dental Research 2008; 87 (special issue), Objectives: To evaluate the clinical activity and safety of a mouthrinse containing 0.05% cetyl-pyridinium chloride and 0.05% chlorhexidine in patients on supportive periodontal care (SPC). Methods: This investigation was designed as a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. 34 subjects with a history of chronic periodontitis patients and currently on SPC were selected on the bases of demonstrating an inadequate plaque control (Turesky index >1). After a supragingival prophylaxis and oral hygiene reinforcement, they were asked to rinse twice a day for 3 months with either the test or placebo rinse. Primary outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices (Turesky and Mühlemann-Son, respectively). Probing pocket depths, bleeding on probing and probing attachment levels were also examined as secondary outcome variables. The appearance of undesirable side effects, such as staining, burning feeling and soft-tissue irritation were also recorded. Outcome variables were compared by the ANCOVA test for the parametric data and the chi-square test for the nominal data. Results: Plaque index was significantly reduced in the test group (-0.68; confidence interval (CI): -0.96 to 0.39) while in the control group the plaque index increased (+0.32; CI: +0.01 to +0.64). Differences between groups were statistically significant (p=0.0001). Bleeding on probing was also reduced in the test group (-0.09), while it increased in the control group (+0.08), being the differences between groups statistically significant (p=0.01). The gingival index was reduced in both groups, and no significant differences were detected between them. The same was true for changes in probing pocket depths. In regards to the safety of the tested product, when compared with the placebo rinse, differences were found for tooth staining (p=0.07) and burning sensation (p=0.08). Conclusions: The tested mouthwash demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing plaque and bleeding in patients undergoing SPC but demonstrating an inadequate mechanical plaque control. Supported by Dentaid. 8 A randomized clinical trial on the short-term clinical and microbiological effects of the adjunctive use of a 0.05% chlorhexidine mouth rinse for patients in supportive periodontal care. S. Santos, D. Herrera, E. López, A. O’Connor, I. González, M. Sanz: A randomized clinical trial on the short-term clinical and microbiological effects of the adjunctive use of a 0.05% chlorhexidine mouth rinse for patients in supportive periodontal care. J Clin Periodontol 2004; 31: 45-51 Objective: To evaluate the clinical and microbiological activity of a new mouth rinse formulation, used as an adjunct to oral hygiene, for patients in supportive periodontal care. Patients and Methods: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial with two groups: test group, rinsing twice per day with the test product (with 0.05% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride); and control group, rinsing with a placebo. Treated chronic periodontitis patients were included, and two visits were rendered, baseline, and after 15 days. Clinical outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices, and probing pocket depth. Subgingival samples were processed by culturing. Patient-based variables and adverse effects were also assessed. Outcome variables were compared by t-test, X2, and Mann-Whitney test. Results: The results belonged to 33 patients. Plaque and gingival indices, and the log of bacterial total counts were reduced in the test group (p<0.01), but differences between groups were only statistically significant (p<0.05) for plaque and bacterial counts. A significant reduction in the proportions of flora (p<0.05) and frequency of detection (p = 0.01) of Porphyromonas gingivalis was observed in the test group. Conclusions: The newly formulated mouth rinse demonstrated short-term plaque inhibitory activity. This was associated with a reduction in the total load of anaerobic subgingival microflora. *Supported by Dentaid. 9 Clinical and microbiological effect of a mouthrinse for patients in supportive care S. Roldán, S. Santos, D. Herrera, A. O’Connor, I. González, M. Sanz. Clinical and microbiological effect of a mouthrises for patients in supportive care. Presented at the IADR in Cardiff 2002 Aim: To evaluate the antiplaque and antigingivitis effect of a new mouthrinse, with low concentration of chlorhexidine, aimed to be used during supportive periodontal care. Additionally, the microbiological effects were assessed. Material and Methods. The study was designed as a clinical trial, randomized, parallel, prospective, placebo-controlled, with two groups: test group, with rinsing twice per day with the tested product (Perio·Aid Maintenance®, containing 0.05% CHX and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride); control group, with an identical vehicle without the active ingredients). 33 treated chronic periodontitis patients were included, and 2 visits were rendered, baseline, and 15 days. Clinical outcome variables included plaque indexes (Turesky and Dichotomous), gingival indexes (Mulheman & Son, Silness & Löe). Subgingival samples for microbiological cultures were taken from 4 selected sites, and pooled together. Clinical variables were compared by t-test, both for intra and inter group comparisons. Microbiological variables were assessed by t-test, chi-square (frequency of detection of pathogens), and Mann-Whitney test (proportion of flora of pathogens). Results. Results belonged to 33 patients (17 in test group, 16 in control group). Turesky index was reduced in the test group (de 1.10 a 0.71, p=0.005), and differences between groups were statistically significant (p=0.02). The same was true for the dichotomous index (intra group p<0.001; inter group p=0.007). Gingival indexes were also improved in the test group (Mulheman&Son, p=0.01; Silness & Löe, p=0.009), but inter groups differences were not significant. The log of bacterial total counts was reduced in the test group (from 6.02 to 5.34, p=0.01), while minor changes occurred in the control group (from 5.84 to 5.92). Inter group differences reached the level of significance (p=0.01). Moreover, it was observed in the test group a significant reduction in the proportions of flora (p<0.05) and frequency of detection (p=0.01) of P. gingivalis. Conclusions. The newly formulated mouthrinse, with a low CHX concentration, demonstrated antiplaque (both intra and inter group), and antigingivitis activity (intra group). This was associated with an effect on the subgingival microflora, reducing the total load and the proportions and frequency of detection of P. gingivalis. Supported by Dentaid, Spain. 10 Microbiological effect of mouth-wash in supportive therapy S. Santos, D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. González, M. Sanz. Microbiological effect of mouth-wash in supportive therapy. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 (Suppl 4): 17 Aim: To evaluate microbiological effects on the subgingival microflora of a new mouth-rinse, developed to help in the supportive therapy of periodontitis patients. Patients and methods: This was a clinical trial, randomized, parallel, with two groups: test group, rinsing twice per day with Perio·Aid Mantenimiento® [0.05% chlorhexidine (CHX) and 0.05% cetylpyridinium (CPC)]; control group, with a placebo. Patients treated with chronic periodontitis were included, and two visits were rendered, baseline and 15 days. Subgingival samples for microbiological cultures were taken from four selected sites, as well as clinical variables. Different statistical tests were used: t-test, chi-square and Mann-Whitney test. Results: Results belonged to 32 patients. The dichotomous plaque index showed a significant reduction (P < 0.001) in the test group, and a significant difference between groups (P = 0.015) was detected. Bleeding on sampling depicted a significant (P = 0.001) reduction in the test group. Bacterial total counts were significantly reduced (P = 0.015) in the test group. Inter-group comparison detected significant differences (P = 0.017). Significant reductions, in the frequency of detection (P = 0.011) and proportions of flora (P = 0.049) of P. gingivalis, were observed in the test group. Conclusions: The test product clearly affected the subgingival microflora, by significantly reducing the total counts, and the frequency of detection and proportions of flora of P. gingivalis. Conclusions: Supported by Dentaid, Spain. 11 Mouth-rinses after initial therapy of periodontitis C. Soers, C. Dekeyser, D. van Steenberghe, M. Quirynen. Mouth-rinses after initial therapy of periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 (Suppl 4): 17 Aim: A double-blind, randomized, clinical trial evaluated the long-term effect of two mouth-rinses: Corsodyl® (chlorhexidine 0.2% + alcohol = CHX/alc) and 14 BIBLIOGRAPHY Perio·Aid Maintenance® (chlorhexidine 005% + cetylpyridinium chloride 0.05% and no alcohol = CHX/CPC) during maintenance therapy, in comparison to a placebo. The study enrolled three parallel groups; this interim report is based on eight patients/group. Methods: In 24 periodontitis patients, a full-mouth one-stage therapy (FMOS) was completed in 24 h. Besides daily mechanical plaque control, each patient rinsed two times per day with one of the three rinses (10 mL for 1 min), during 6 months. Periodontal parameters were recorded at 0, 1, 3 and 6 months. Microbial culturing (plaque and saliva) took place at 0,3 and 6 months. Results: The subgingival microbial load showed a significant treatment (FMOS) effect and only insignificant improvements with any of the two active rinses. The plaque indices showed significant additional improvements (P < 0.05) with the two rinses when compared to placebo. For the bleeding indices an additional effect of active rinses became significant only at month 6. Staining differences were noticed, especially at month 3 for CHX/alc. Conclusion: Considering the side effects, CHX/CPC rinse may be an alternative for CHX/alc during maintenance therapy. Acknowlegement: This study was partially supported by Dentaid (Spain). 12 A 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride / 0.05% chlorhexidine formulation as mouthrinse during maintenance phase after initial periodontal therapy M. Quirynen, C. Soers, M. Desnyder, C. Dekeyser, M. Pauwels, D. van Steenberghe. A 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride / 0.05% chlorhexidine formulation as mouthrinse during-maintenance phase after initial periodontal therapy. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2005; 32: 390-400 Background: Chlorhexidine mouthrinse/spray (CHX) can still be considered the golden standard in the chemical prevention of plaque formation and development of gingivitis. The product unfortunately has some side-effects, such as extrinsic tooth staining, poor taste, taste disturbance, sensitivity changes in tongue, pain, and irritation because of the alcohol content. These side effects led to the search of new formulations. Methods: In this double-blind, randomised, long-term, parallel study 48 moderate periodontitis patients rinsed for 6 months (starting immediately after a “onestage, full-mouth” disinfection) with one of the following products: CHX 0,2% + alcohol (Corsodyl®), CHX 0.05% + CPC 0.05% and no alcohol (Perio·Aid® Maintenance, a new formulation), or the placebo of the latter. After 1, 3 and 6 months a serious of clinical and microbiological parameters were recorded for the supra and subgingival area as well as for saliva. Results: Although the significant treatment impact (mechanical debridement) in all groups, both CHX solutions further decreased both plaque and gingivitis indices (p < 0.001 and p< 0.05, respectively), when compared to placebo. This was also reflected by additional reductions in the number of CFU/ml of aerobic and especially anaerobic species and by a suppression of S. mutans (versus an overgrowth for the placebo), in all niches. Differences between both CHX solutions were never encountered. The subjective ratings were slightly in favour of the new CHX-CPC formulation when compared with the other CHX-alcohol formulation, especially for taste of the product (p < 0.05), but less impressive for the staining of teeth and tongue. Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated the potential of a new CHX 0.05% + CPC 0.05% non-alcoholic formulation as an effective anti-plaque and anti-inflammatory agent for long-term use with reduced subjective side effects. *Supported by Dentaid. 13 Efficacy of a low-concentration chlorhexidine mouth rinse in non-compliant periodontitis patients attending a supportive periodontal care programme: a randomized clinical trial Escribano M, Herrera D, Morante S, Teughels W, Quirynen M, Sanz M. Efficacy of a low-concentration chlorhexidine mouthrinse in non-compliant periodontitis patients attending a supportive periodontal care programme: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 2010; 367(3): 266-275 Objective: To assess the clinical and microbiological efficacy of a 0.05% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetyl-pyridinium chloride mouth rinse in supportive periodontal care (SPC) in patients with inadequate plaque control. Material and Methods: The study was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with moderate to severe chronic periodontitis under SPC with an inadequate plaque control (Turesky index >1). After supragingival prophylaxis and oral hygiene reinforcement, participants rinsed twice a day for 3 months with the test or placebo solutions, in addition to conventional hygiene. Primary clinical outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices. As secondary outcomes, periodontal and microbiological variables were studied. ANCOVA and x2 tests were used to compare the variables. Results: Forty-seven patients (22 placebo and 25 test group) participated. After 3 months, plaque levels increased in the placebo group, while diminished in the test group (po0.001). Similar effects were found for bleeding on probing. The other clinical parameters did not show significant differences. Microbiological variables demonstrated inter-group significant reductions in subgingival counts of Fusobacterium nucleatum and Prevotella intermedia and a decrease of the total bacterial counts in saliva. Conclusions: The tested mouth rinse demonstrated efficacy in reducing plaque and gingivitis, as well as in decreasing the microbial load in saliva and gingival sulcus. 14 Plaque inhibition of two commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses Van Strydonck DAC, Timmerman MF, van der Velden U, van der Weijden GA: Plaque inhibition of two commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32: 305–309. Background: The aim of the present study was to assess the effect on plaque inhibition and taste perception of two commercially available mouthrinses (0.12% CHX non-alcohol base with 0.05% cetyl pyridinium chloride (Cpc) versus 0.2% CHX alcohol base). Methods: The study was designed as a single-blind, randomized two group parallel experiment, to compare two different commercially available mouthrinses, during a 3-day plaque accumulation model. Forty healthy volunteers were enrolled in the study and received a thorough dental prophylaxis at the beginning of the test period. Over a 72-h experimental non-brushing period, during which subjects abstained from all forms of mechanical oral hygiene, one group (test) used a 15ml alcohol free 0.12% CHX (518 mg) mouthrinse on a Cpc base (Perioaids, CHX Cpc), twice daily for 30 s. The other group (control) used a 10ml 0.2% CHX (520 mg) mouthrinse on an 11.8% ethanol alcohol base (Corsodyls, CHX Alc), twice daily for 60 s. After 72 h of plaque formation, the amount of plaque was evaluated. By the use of visual analogue scale, the subjects were asked for their appreciation of the taste of the mouthrinse they had used. Results: The mean plaque index for the CHX Cpc group was 0.97 and for the CHX Alc group 0.78. After 72 h of non-brushing, there was no significant difference in plaque accumulation between the two groups. The answers to the questions (taste perception and after-taste) showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups. The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for taste appreciation on a scale from very bad to very good taste (0–10) were 5.92 for the CHX Cpc group and 4.10 for the CHX Alc group (p50.02). The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for the after-taste on a scale from very short to very long (0–10) were 7.24 for the CHX Cpc group and 5.38 for the CHX Alc group. Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study design, it can be concluded that rinsing with a 0.12% CHX mouthrinse on a non-alcohol base with 0.05% Cpc (Perio-Aids) is not significantly different from rinsing with a 0.2% CHX mouthrinse on an alcohol base (Corsodyls). It appears that the subjects appreciated the taste of the non-alcohol CHX solution better but the after-taste of the rinse remained longer in the mouth. 15 Cleans all spaces for complete oral hygiene Stem • Plastic (poliuretane) covered stainless steel wire protects gums and enamel. • Does not damage implants or irritate sensitive areas. Bent tip • For better access to posterior spaces. Filaments • Black Tynex® filaments: To detect remaining bacterial plaque. • White Tynex® filaments: To detect bleeding. Protective cap • Protects and ensures optimal hygiene of the filaments. New bicoloured design • To distinguish the handle grip area. INTERPROX PHD sizes: CONICAL CONICAL CYLINDRICAL INDICATIONS 16 Interdental spaces Adequate interdental hygiene prevents the onset and development of caries and periodontal disease. Implants Cleaning the implant area helps eliminate dental biofilm and maintain optimal oral hygiene. Diastemae Wide spaces between teeth require special attention to avoid dental biofilm build-up. Orthodontic appliances Patients with orthodontic appliances must increase their dental hygiene efforts paying close attention to the hard-to-reach areas: around brackets, metal bands, wires and gingival margins. Fixed prostheses Food debris tends to accumulate around fixed bridges. Therefore, proper oral hygiene is necessary in these hard-to-reach areas. Furcal areas When gum recession occurs, the uncovered furcal space is exposed to food and can be filled with dental biofilm, calculus and bacterial debris. *ISO 16409: International standard for manual interdental brushes Gel Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel Zinc lactate Increases the substantivity of CPC, lengthening its activity. 0.14% Allantoin Promotes healthy gums 0.10% Presentations 0.3% 1450ppm 20ml 13 • Reduces dental biofilm build up • Control bad breath Toothpaste Mouthwash Chlorhexidine digluconate Efficiently fights dental biofilm Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation 0.05% 0.05% 0.05% 1450ppm _____ _____ 0.14% 0.14% 0.14% ____ ____ Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel Zinc Lactate Increases the substantivity of CPC, lengthening its activity. Xylitol Moisturises oral cavity and caries prevention. Presentations REFERENCES: 1.S. Roldán, E.G. Winkel, D. Herrera, M. Sanz, A.J. van Winkelhoff. The effects of a new mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride and zinc lactate on the microflora of oral halitosis patients: a dual-centre, double-blind placebo-controlled study. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 427-434 2.E.G. Winkel, S. Roldán, A.J. van Winkelhoff, D.Herrera, M. Sanz. Clinical effects of a new mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride and zinc-lactate on oral halitosis. A dual-center, doubleblind placebo-controlled study. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 300-306 3.D. Van Steenberghe, Pl Avontroodt, W. Peeters, M. Pauwels, W.Coucke, A. Lijnen, M.Quirynen. Effect of different mouthrinses on morning breath. J Periodontol 2001; 72:1183-91 14 Spray _____ 10% 75ml 0.05% 0.05% 150ml/500ml Tongue cleaner Removes the dental biofilm that forms on the tongue surface. 15ml 4.S. Roldán, D. Herrera, M. Sanz, A.J. van Winkelhoff, E.G.Winkel et al. Estudio multicéntrico, paralelo y controlado con placebo, de la efectividad a corto plazo, de un colutorio de nueva formulación, en el tratamiento de halitosis oral: - M. Sanz, S. Roldán, E.G. Winkel, A.J. van Winkelhoff, D. Herrera. Antimicrobial efficacy of an antiseptic mouthrinse in the treatment of oral halitosis. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80-599 - S. Roldán, D. Herrera, I. González, M. Sanz. The effect of a specific therapeutic approach on the oral microbial environment. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80:599 - E.G. Winkel, S. Roldán, A.J.van Winkelhoff, M. Sanz. The effect of cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine and zinc lactate (Halita) on oral halitosis. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80:797 DENTAID XEROS GEL For patients that need more moisture. DENTAID XEROS TOOTHPASTE DENTAID XEROS MOUTHWASH The daily use toothpaste that helps moisturize the oral cavity. The daily use mouthwash that helps moisturize the oral cavity. DENTAID XEROS SPRAY Stimulates natural saliva production. Toothpaste Mouthwash Betaine Long-lasting moisturiser and osmotic protective agent Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel 4.0% 1450ppm _____ 1.33% Promotes healthy gums Xylitol Moisturises oral cavity and caries prevention 10.0%3.30% Allantoin Promotes healthy gums 0.10% Malic acid Stimulates natural saliva production; does not erode enamel Presentations Consisting of phosphate ions, keeps pH from dropping below 5.5 while tablets dissolve in the mouth, preventing enamel erosion. 1.0% Spray _____ 226ppm 15ppm226ppm _____ _____ 0.05% Aloe Vera Buffer system Gel 0.10% 10.0% _____ 10.0% _____ _____ _____ _____ 1.0% _____ _____ _____ _____ 75ml 500ml 50ml 15ml REFERENCES: 1. ADSP da Mata, DN da Silva Marques, JML Silveira, JROF Marques, ET de Melo Campos Felino, NFRPM Guilherme. Effects of gustatory stimulants of salivary secretion on salivary pH and flow: a randomized controlled trial. Oral Diseases (2009) 15, 220-228. 15 DENTAID technology nanorepair ® • • • • • Intense desensitising action • Starts working from the first application Daily use Helps to prevent tooth sensitivity Reinforces enamel Protects gums NEW Desensin Repair Desensin Repair 0,45% 0,0125% _____ 5,00% 1450 ppm 1,0% 0,1% 0,30% 1,00% 226 ppm 0,5% 0,10% _____ 5,0% 1450 ppm _____ _____ _____ _____ 75ml 500ml Toothpaste Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles Form a protective coat to prevent dental sensitivity. Potassium nitrate Sodium fluoride Pro-vitamin B5 (Panthenol) Allantoin Vitamin E Prevents tooth sensitivity Reinforces enamel Protects gums Promotes healthy gums Protects gums Presentations REFERENCES: 1. Gil Loscos FJ, Fuenmayor Fernández V. Hipersensibilidad dentinaria: Causas y posibilidades de tratamiento. Periodoncia 1999; 9 (1): 69-76. 2. Navajas Rodríguez de Mondelo, JM. La interfase entre los tejidos dentales cavitados y el material de restauración. En: Echevarría JJ, Cuenca E, editores. Manual de odontología. Barcelona: Ed. Masson, 1998: 590-1. 3. Addy M. Etiología de la hipersensibilidad dentinal. In: Mendieta C, Coordinator. Hiperestesias dentinales. Barcelona: Dentaid S.A., 1997: 25-38. 4. García Barbero J, editor Fisiopatología dentaria. Patología y Terapéutica dental. Madrid: Ed. Síntesis, 1997: 67-68 5. Matas F, Quinteros A, Mendieta C. Periodoncia para el práctico general. Periodoncia JulSep 1997; 7 (3): 181-190. 6. Herlofson BB, Barkvoll P. Oral mucosal desquamation caused by two toothpaste detergents in an experimental model. Eur J Oral Sci 1996; 104: 21-6. 16 Mouthwash Gel 75ml 7. Herlofson BB, Barkvoll P. Oral mucosal desquamation caused by two toothpaste detergents in an experimental model. Eur J Oral Sci 1996; 104: 21-6. 8. Drake DR, Wiemann AH, Rivera EM, Walton RE. Bacterial retention in canal walls in vitro: effect of Smear Layer. Journal of Endodontics 1994; 20 (2): 78-82. 9. Pashley DH. Over the counter dentifrices in the treatment of tooth hypersensitivity. Dental Clin North Ame 1990; 34 (3): 466-7. 10. Kanapka JA. Over the counter dentifrices in the treatment of tooth hypersensitivity. Dental Clin North Ame 1990; 34 (3): 545-560. 11. Clark DC, Hanley JA, Geoghean S, Vinet D. The effectiveness of a fluoride varnish and a desensitizing toothpaste in treating dentine hypersensitivity. J Periodont Res 1985; 20: 212-6. 12. Tarbet WJ, Silverman G, Fratarcangelo PA, Kanapka JA. Home treatment for dentinal hypersensitivity: A comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc 1982; 105 (2): 227. VITIS DESENSIN Toothbrushes VITIS soft access VITIS soft VITIS medium access VITIS medium VITIS hard access VITIS hard VITIS junior VITIS gingival VITIS sensitive VITIS ultrasoft VITIS surgical VITIS perio VITIS monotip VITIS orthodontic access VITIS orthodontic VITIS implant/sulcular VITIS implant brush VITIS implant monotip VITIS implant angular Toothpastes VITIS whitening toothpaste VITIS aloe vera toothpaste VITIS aloe vera toothpaste VITIS aloe vera (apple-mint flavour) toothpaste VITIS gingival toothpaste VITIS gingival toothpaste VITIS Xtra Forte toothpaste VITIS antiage toothpaste VITIS orthodontic toothpaste VITIS electric toothpaste VITIS junior gel VITIS aloe vera toothpaste VITIS gingival toothpaste VITIS antiage toothpaste Mouthwashes VITIS aloe vera mouthwash VITIS aloe vera mouthwash VITIS gingival mouthwash VITIS gingival mouthwash VITIS Xtra Forte mouthwash VITIS orthodontic mouthwash VITIS whitening mouthwash • New products 500 ml 500ml 20 tablets 15ml HALITA Halita Halita Halita Halita Halita Halita tongue cleaner mouthwash mouthwash spray Forte spray with Fluoride toothpaste 500 ml 150 ml 15 ml 15 ml 75 ml INTERPROX 100ml 150ml 100ml 100ml 150ml 100ml 100ml 100ml 100ml 100ml 75ml 15ml 15ml 15ml 1000ml 300ml 1000ml 500ml 500ml 500ml 500ml Plus Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Plus Nano Super micro Super micro Micro Micro Mini Conical Mini Mini Conical Maxi X-Maxi XX-Maxi 6U 10U 6U 10U 6U 6U 10U 6U 6U 6U 4U 4U Access Interprox Access Mini Interprox Access Conical Interprox Access Maxi Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Interprox Super micro 6U Micro18U Micro6U Mini Conical 6U Mini18U Mini6U Cylindrical 6U Conical6U Maxi6U Gel Interprox Gel 20 ml PERIO·AID DentaidXeros gel toothpaste mouthwash spray tablets chewing gum Mouthwashes Desensin Plus mouthwash Desensin Repair mouthwash Plac Control Plac Control liquid Orthodontic wax VITIS Orthodontic wax VITIS Orthodontic cleansing tablets Xeros Xeros Xeros Xeros Xeros Xeros 75 ml 75 ml PLAC CONTROL Flosses and tapes VITIS dental floss VITIS waxed dental floss VITIS soft waxed dental floss VITIS dental tape VITIS waxed dental tape VITIS threader VITIS floss applicator dentaid dentaid dentaid dentaid dentaid dentaid Toothpastes Desensin Gel Desensin Repair toothpaste 50 ml 75 ml 500 ml 15 ml 90U Perio Perio Perio Perio Perio Perio Perio Perio Aid Aid Aid Aid Aid Aid Aid Aid 0,12% mouthwash 0,12% mouthwash 0,12% gel 0,12% spray 0,12% mouthwash Maintenance mouthwash Maintenance mouthwash Maintenance mouthwash 500 ml 150 ml 75 ml 50 ml 5000 ml 1000 ml 500 ml 150 ml For more information: www.dentaid.com 17 Index DENTAID’S mission 2 VITIS toothbrushes4 VITIS implant6 VITIS gingival8 VITIS Orthodontic9 PERIO•AID 10 INTERPROX 12 HALITA 14 DENTAID XEROS 15 DESENSIN 16 DENTAID products17 22 WHEN SCIENCE AND PROFESSIONAL KNOW-HOW COME TOGETHER ORAL HEALTH IMPROVES Covering all angles of oral health is a commitment that involves collaborating with professionals. This is the only way to improve oral health globally. The Oral Health Experts www.dentaid.com 24 1000285 Follow us on: