Mi paste how does it work

The use of MPP in orthodontic patients with subsurface enamel lesions did not improve these lesions over the 1-year period of the study, as evaluated by QLF imaging, microbiological composition and acidogenicity, as well as by digital oral photographs. The lesion depth in both groups showed an overall improvement assessed by QLF primary outcome , while the secondary optical assessment by ICDAS showed the lesions to be unchanged in both groups.

No significant additional improvement was measured for patients receiving MPP. The plaque composition, regarding bacterial counts, the proportions of aciduric bacteria, S. MPP did not have an effect on the visual changes of WSLs on the long term, when assessed on photographs.

Lesions remained visible over time. This study is the first to address the efficacy of MMP for the treatment of post-orthodontic WSL in vivo during 1 year following debonding, that is, long term. We found a lack of positive evidence to support the effectiveness of MPP as a remineralizing agent, to be effective for the treatment of post-orthodontic WSLs. This outcome was confirmed by several independent detection methods, which strengthens this conclusion.

MPP does not have a positive effect on WSL improvement seen by QLF imaging or optical assessment nor does it have a neutralizing effect on the bacterial oral flora. Regardless the application of the product or control, lesions tended to improve after removing orthodontic fixed appliance.

Similarly, removing the orthodontic fixed appliance had a positive effect on the composition and acidity of the bacteria on the long term, which was not affected by either product. Although the efficacy of CPP-ACPF for the prevention and regression of incipient lesions has been demonstrated in vitro 13 , 14 , there is a lack of reliable evidence for the treatment of post-orthodontic WSL in vivo 15 , 16 and the long-term effect of this remineralizing agent is unclear This study is the first to address these aspects.

In vitro 11 , 13 and in situ studies 14 , 25 , 27 have demonstrated that CPP-ACP may promote the remineralization of subsurface enamel lesions. These findings are summarized in a meta-analysis for in vitro and in situ studies regarding the effect of CPP-ACP as a caries-preventive agent When evaluating in vivo studies, Chen et al.

A systematic research described by Li et al. Our findings contradict with the findings of Bailey et al. Bailey et al. Their conclusion was based on visual assessment of lesion activity of inactivity However, the lesions investigated were very small 0. One may debate clinical relevancy. Andersson 30 compared the effects of CPP-ACP with fluoride mouthwashes on the regression of WSL and concluded that both regimens could promote regression of WSL after debonding of fixed orthodontic appliances, though the visual evaluation suggested an aesthetically more favourable outcome of the ACP.

The study was performed in a diverse population of teenagers in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The Netherlands is part of Western Europe and has no water fluoridation. Therefore, water fluoridation did not affect the outcome of this study. WSL developed during orthodontic treatment appear more rapidly and are more porous than WSL in non-orthodontic patients. As a result, the findings of this study are only applicable to WSL developed during orthodontic treatment.

The efficacy of this remineralization agent on WSLs after orthodontic treatment with full fixed appliances was not influenced by background levels of fluoride. As for all randomized clinical trials, non-compliance of the subject could have influenced the result. The assessment of product use via returned product failed entirely because none of the subjects returned their product tubes at recall visits.

Also, we did not use an application tray, for example, a removable clear retainer to improve the cream to stay in place. Though by not using an application tray, saliva could now also influence possible remineralization. This could be the explanation of for the positive results found in vitro and in situ This contradicts the findings of in vivo study results.

The question can also be raised if there was a similarity of intervention. As there might be a taste difference between the two products. Cross contamination is not to be expected as no siblings were included. We aimed to have 27 participants per group as was assessed as the effect size. Unfortunately, due to drop out, it became lower with 25 to 26 per group. The used power was 0. So, we can state that a power of 0.

Even so the effect found is so small that even if statistical significant it is still not clinically relevant. The use of MPP in patients with subsurface enamel lesions after orthodontic fixed appliance treatment does not show an additional superior improvement of these lesions on the long term as measured by means of QLF imaging, microbiological composition and its acidity, as well as by digital oral photographs.

This suggests that there is no clinical evidence to support that MPP is a remineralization agent as it is not effective to improve post-orthodontic subsurface lesions. None of thse authors or study received personnel or consulting payments or any other form of personal benefit from GC Benelux.

Full details of the trial protocol NL. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Supplementary material is available at European Journal of Orthodontics online. MHvdV is a co-inventor on several patents relating to quantitative light-induced fluorescence.

The authors declare that otherwise there is no conflict of interest pertaining to the data presented in this article. And we would like to thank Florence Boekitwetan for her contribution as a second observer of the digital photographs data.

MHvdV conceived and designed the trial. JMtC approved the intended effort to perform the trial. We would like to thank Cor van Loveren, who monitored the study and functioned as independent dentist for the judgement of adverse events. MJB performed data analysis and MWB performed the clinical examinations, interviews, and data collection. All authors received and contributed to the paper before submitting for publication. Gorelick , L. American Journal of Orthodontics , 81 , 93 — Google Scholar.

Lovrov , S. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics , 68 , — Mizrahi , E. American Journal of Orthodontics , 84 , — Ogaard , B. Part 2. Prevention and treatment of lesions. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics , 94 , — Rosenbloom , R. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics , , 35 — Scheie , A. Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research , 92 , — Ahn , S.

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics , , — Kim , K. Reynolds , E. Australian Dental Journal , 53 , — Cross , K. Biomaterials , 25 , — Journal of Dental Research , 76 , — Cochrane , N.

Advances in Dental Research , 24 , 41 — Caries Research , 42 , 88 — Journal of Dental Research , 87 , — Chen , H. Raphael , S. A systematic review. BioMed Central Oral Health , 15 , Journal of Dentistry , 42 , — Schulze-Schweifing , K. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology , 4 , Beerens , M. Archives of Oral Biology , 78 , 88 — Alcaraz , L. Clinical Microbiology and Infection , 18 , 54 — Demografische kerncijfers per gemeente Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.

European Journal of Oral Sciences , , — Koopman , J. Microbial Ecology , 72 , — Bradford , M. Analytical Biochemistry , 72 , — Cai , F. Australian Dental Journal , 48 , — Boersma , J. Caries Research , 39 , 41 — Morgan , M.

Caries Research , 42 , — Bailey , D. Journal of Dental Research , 88 , — Clinical Oral Investigations , 15 , — Andersson , A. Oral Health and Preventive Dentistry , 5 , — Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide.

Fluoride is often called nature's cavity fighter and your dentist may recommend that version if you're at a higher risk for tooth decay. You apply each kind of paste the same way. You use your finger or a custom mouthguard-shaped tray to apply the paste onto each tooth surface once or twice daily, leave it on for up to five minutes, then spit it out. That helps protect the enamel from decay and helps keep your smile healthy and bright! Please fill out the form below.

Coast Dental Blog. Preventing and targeting white spot formation early is an important preventive step in oral health care, mitigating the need for further restorative treatment in the future. The special protein helps to maintain a high concentration of gradients of calcium and phosphate on the tooth.

It is believed to provide a new way to reduce and prevent the decalcifications that develop during orthodontic treatment. Study recruits included 60 patients who had permanent dentition and had not used fluoride extensively in the past. Researchers were confident that the study participants would use the paste as directed. The 50 patients who completed the study were first assessed for risk of caries before being administered a fluoride paste and placebo every day for four weeks.

They were analyzed for caries, cavities, and white spot lesions before treatment and then every four weeks after for a total of 12 weeks. Patients asked to administer the paste with a fluoride tray for three to five minutes a day at night after brushing.

Photos recorded the presence or absence of white spots in both groups. Patients were also scored on a scale from zero to six for their level of caries or cavities.

MI Paste Plus showed that it not only prevents white spot lesions, but treats them as well. It reduced white spots on the gingival third of teeth, while the placebo had the opposite effect, leading to more white spot lesions and failing to treat the ones already present. At the beginning of the study, the 26 MI Paste Plus patients had decalcification index scores of At the end, the scores were down by