Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 444
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 19  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 48

Efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate varnish in remineralizing white spot lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis


1 Department of Public Health Dentistry, Y.M.T Dental College and Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Public Health Dentistry, Bapuji Dental College and Hospital, Davangere, Karnataka, India
3 Chief Dental Surgeon, Border Security Force, Ministry of Home Affairs, Guwahati, Assam, India
4 Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Maratha Mandal's Nathajirao G. Halgekar Institute of Dental, Sciences and Research Centre, Belgaum, Karnataka, India
5 Department of Public Health Dentistry, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India

Date of Submission19-Sep-2021
Date of Acceptance19-Jan-2022
Date of Web Publication01-Jun-2022

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Bhuvaneshwari Gangadharamurthy Nadar
Department of Public Health Dentistry, Y.M.T Dental College and Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.346406

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACPF) varnish for remineralization of white spot lesions (WSLs) “in vitro” in human teeth.
Materials and Methods: Literature search included three databases, namely Medline (via PubMed), The Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register, and Google Scholar from 2010 to January 2021. The studies assessing WSL depth, calcium, phosphate ion release, and microhardness due to artificial demineralization or remineralization were considered for review. Reference articles were retrieved, and a customized risk assessment tool was used. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to generate the risk of bias summary graph. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. Heterogeneity was evaluated by Cochrane's test, and random effects model was used to pool estimate of effect and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for surface microhardness.
Results: Eighteen studies were selected for review based on the eligibility criteria. Four studies showed superior remineralizing effect of CPP-ACPF compared to fluoride varnishes. Four studies involving 120 human permanent teeth samples were included in the meta-analysis. Efficacy of CPP-ACPF varnish was equivalent to other fluoride varnishes in improving surface microhardness after remineralization during 7-day period (mean surface microhardness: 3.94, 95% CI [−9.08–1.21], I2: 75%, P = 0.13). Major risks of bias associated with the studies included in the review were inadequate sample size, improper sample preparation, and unexplained blinding.
Conclusion: CPP-ACPF varnish appears to be equally effective as other fluoride varnishes in remineralizing artificially induced WSLs, but quality of evidence is low.

Keywords: Casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate, meta-analysis, remineralization, varnish


How to cite this article:
Nadar BG, Yavagal PC, Velangi CS, Yavagal CM, Basavaraj SP. Efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate varnish in remineralizing white spot lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Res J 2022;19:48

How to cite this URL:
Nadar BG, Yavagal PC, Velangi CS, Yavagal CM, Basavaraj SP. Efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate varnish in remineralizing white spot lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Res J [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Sep 25];19:48. Available from: https://www.drjjournal.net/text.asp?2022/19/1/48/346406




  Introduction Top


The development of caries involves a dynamic biological process where acids produced by bacterial glycolysis of dietary carbohydrates cause demineralization of dental hard tissues. Noncavitated white spot lesions (WSLs) are indicative of early stage of dental caries. These lesions are considered reversible if detected early.[1] Topical application of fluoride-releasing materials has been used over three decades to combat dental caries.[2],[3] They are considered important adjuvants in clinical practice, particularly when the patient's level of cooperation is low.[4] The major mechanism of fluoride ions in preventing enamel demineralization is by promoting the formation of fluorapatite in enamel in the presence of calcium and phosphate ions produced by plaque bacterial organic acids.[5],[6] Fluoride ions can also drive the remineralization of previously demineralized enamel if enough salivary or plaque calcium and phosphate ions are available when the fluoride is applied.[7] Therefore, on topical application of fluoride ions, the availability of calcium and phosphate ions can be the limiting factor for net enamel remineralization to occur.[7] To overcome the limited bioavailability of calcium and phosphate ions, calcium phosphate-based remineralization systems such as amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP), calcium sodium phosphosilicate bioactive glass, and casein phosphopeptide-stabilized ACP were developed. The remineralizing potential of casein phosphopeptide-ACP (CPP-ACP) in cariogenic studies on animals, was demonstrated by researchers in 1995, and only in 2009 was it used for the treatment of WSLs.[8] CPP-ACP nanocomplexes is a technology based on ACP stabilized by casein phosphopeptides (CPP).[7] CPPs stabilize high concentrations of calcium and phosphate ions, together with fluoride ions, at the tooth surface by binding to pellicle and plaque. These ions are freely bioavailable to diffuse down concentration gradients into enamel subsurface lesions, thereby effectively promoting remineralization in vivo.[7]

Varnishes allow for the delivery of high concentrations of fluoride in small amounts.[9] The effectiveness, the relative safety, high fluoride uptake, and the ease of application, offer significant advantages over other professionally applied topical fluoride treatments such as fluoride gels, foams, and mouthrinses.[9] CPP-ACPF varnish is unique in that it uses Recaldent (CPP-ACP) technology incorporated with 5% sodium fluoride. The inclusion of CPP-ACP in MI varnish® (GC America Inc., Alsip, IL, USA) has been proven to inhibit enamel demineralization to a much greater extent than fluoride varnishes without CPP-ACP.[10],[11] Literature search revealed three systematic reviews on CPP-ACP, with one focusing on effectiveness of MI paste and the other two reviewing effect of all formulations of CPP-ACP in human randomized clinical trials.[12],[13],[14] Review of in vitro studies comparing remineralizing potential of CPP-ACPF varnish with other fluoride varnishes has not been done. Hence, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of CPP-ACPF varnish in remineralizing WSLs in vitro on human teeth.

[TAG:2]Materials and Methods [/TAG:2]

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions[15] and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement guidelines were followed for review.[16] The Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design method as applicable is presented in [Table 1]. The protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021237900).
Table 1: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design format of study

Click here to view


Search strategy for article identification

An extensive electronic search for in vitro clinical trials via three databases, namely Medline (via PubMed), The Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register, and Google Scholar, till January 29, 2021, was done. The outcomes of the search and Medical Subject Headings are summarized in [Table 2]. Hand searching was performed for relevant journals and the reference lists of all eligible studies for additional relevant studies. No restrictions on the language or date of publication were applied during the search. Reference articles were retrieved and exported to the Mendeley Desktop 1.13.3 software (Elsevier. Mendeley Ltd, London, United Kingdom).[17] The authors were not blinded to country or journal names.
Table 2: Search strategy of the study

Click here to view


Selection of studies

The review included in vitro studies on human teeth from 2010 to January 2021. The studies assessing depth of WSL, microhardness due to artificial demineralization or remineralization and calcium, phosphate ion release, and mineral loss/gain were considered for review. Case reports, abstracts, editorials, review articles, non-English articles, animal studies, and studies testing formulations of CPP-ACP, such as sugar-free gums, lozenges, fluoridated gels, mouth rinse, paste, and antibacterial gels, were excluded from review.

Data extraction

One author searched the studies, screened the titles and abstracts of each study based on the criteria, and extracted data. Two authors independently rechecked the full text of the screened studies. Any disagreement between the two authors, was resolved by a third reviewer. Data collected for each study included information pertaining to year of publication, authorship, sample size, study characteristics like intervention, comparison, follow-up period, examination methods, and results.

Assessment of risk of bias

A customized risk assessment tool was prepared using Office of Health Assessment and Translation risk-of-bias tool[18] and checklist for reporting in vitro studies guidelines.[19] The domains evaluated are listed in [Figure 1]. All included studies were assessed independently by two review authors who were not blinded to identifying details of articles. Each domain was classified as having a low, high, or unclear risk of bias. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used to generate the risk of bias summary graph.[20]
Figure 1: Cochrane risk of bias of the included studies (a) graph, (b) summary

Click here to view


Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4.[21] Heterogeneity between the estimates was evaluated by Cochrane's test (I2 test) at α = 0.10.[22] I2 >50% indicated a high heterogeneity.[22] Furthermore, the statistical significance for testing the hypothesis was set at P value (two-tailed) < 0.05. Studies assessing the effect of CPP-ACPF versus fluoride varnishes on surface microhardness of artificially created WSLs in permanent teeth over a period of 1 week were included in the meta-analysis. The treatment effect for each study was summarized using mean differences and standard deviations. Random effects model was used to combine the studies due to the clinical and methodological heterogeneity existing in the studies.[23] A pooled estimate of effect and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for surface microhardness was calculated. Data from eligible studies were extracted into RevMan software and forest plot was generated for graphic presentation. Meta-analysis was not performed for the parameters lesion depth and mineral loss/gain due to dissimilarity in outcome measurements.


  Results Top


Study selection and description

Through the literature search, 913 studies were identified, including 822 duplicates. Seventy-four articles were identified after excluding duplications. A total of 17 articles evaluating the efficacy of MI paste were excluded after reading abstract. Full-text articles were retrieved for 57 relevant studies. Thirty-nine articles were excluded after full-text reading. Finally, 18 studies which met the inclusion criteria were considered [Figure 2]. Review evaluated three different outcomes: lesion depth, surface microhardness, and mineral loss/gain. Studies assessing the remineralization effect of CPP-ACP varnish over a period of 7 days in comparison to other fluoride varnish were pooled. Results of four studies measuring surface microhardness were synthesized using forest plot.
Figure 2: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram of review methodology

Click here to view


Study characteristics

Eighteen relevant studies were found published from 2011 to 2021 (January). Ten studies were reported from Asia, three from the Middle East, two each from America and Australia, and one from Europe. All the studies were conducted on extracted human permanent teeth. These studies reported intervention on permanent molars, premolars, and anterior teeth. Examination methods for surface microhardness assessment included microhardness tester machine expressing Knoop hardness number and Vickers microhardness number. For evaluating lesion depth, polarized light microscope, FluorCam, transverse microradiography, stereomicroscope, micro-computed tomography analysis, and Diagnodent were used. To measure calcium and phosphate ion release, ion chromatography and scanning electron microscope were utilized and transverse microradiography was used for assessing mineral content. Test group considered was only ACP-CPPF varnish compared with one or more control groups such as no treatment, fluoride varnish, and other varnishes. The follow-up period ranged from 4 to 84 days [Table 3].
Table 3: Characteristics of included studies

Click here to view


Risk of bias assessment

Score of 1 was given for each risk of bias item, if mentioned. The overall level of risk for each study was subsequently classified as low risk, “moderate risk/unclear risk,” and “high risk” (if score was 7 or more, 3 or more, and <3 out of the nine categories, respectively). The scores were averaged for each included study. Score was not given when individual risk of bias item was not mentioned clearly. For example: no mention of sample size calculation;[19] blinding and multiple samples prepared from the same specimen.[19] Risk of bias item randomization and allocation concealment were considered low risk as the samples (human teeth enamel) used were homogenous.[18] Overall, 7[26],[31],[32],[34],[38] of the 18 included studies had unclear risk of bias and rest 11[10],[11],[24],[27],[29],[30],[33],[35],[36],[37],[39] had low risk of bias. The risks of bias of the included studies are summarized in [Table 4] [Figure 3]. Major risks of bias associated with these studies included inadequate sample size, improper sample preparation, and unexplained blinding.
Table 4: Summary of risk of bias of the included studies

Click here to view
Figure 3: Forest plot summary of included studies

Click here to view


Synthesis of results – Effect of interventions

Surface microhardness

Out of six studies, five studies[27],[30],[31],[32],[34] showed no significant difference in surface microhardness between the intervention and fluoride groups after an interval of 7 days. CPP-ACPF varnish groups recorded significantly harder enamel than no treatment groups [Table 5].[24],[27],[28],[29],[31],[32],[34]
Table 5: Summary of findings of review related to surface microhardness, mineral loss/gain, ion release, and lesion depth

Click here to view


For meta-analysis, we pooled data of four studies[27],[30],[31],[34] involving 120 human permanent teeth samples. CPP-ACPF varnish compared to fluoride varnish did not significantly favor improvement of surface microhardness after remineralization during 7-day period (SMH: 3.94, 95% CI [−9.08–1.21], P = 0.13), and there was substantial heterogeneity (tau = 19.2, Chi-squared = 10.7, I2 = 72%) across the studies [Figure 1].

Mineral loss/gain

Three studies evaluated calcium and phosphate ions release. Two studies[11],[36] reported calcium and phosphate ion release to be significantly higher in CPP-ACPF varnish group than fluoride group, whereas in one study, there was no significant difference.[32] The mean change in mineral gain after remineralization was superior in CPP-ACPF varnish group over control.[34],[35],[36] The mineral gain was highest in CPP-ACPF varnish than fluoride groups in a study,[36] but two studies did not report significant result.[34],[35] Reduced mineral loss during demineralization was seen in CPP-ACPF group compared to fluoride varnish[11] [Table 5].

Lesion depth

Of the 12 studies, 2 studies[10],[11] showed superior demineralizing inhibitory effect of CPP-ACPF varnish over fluoride varnish. CPP-ACPF varnish showed superior remineralizing effect when compared to no treatment.[11],[24],[25],[26],[28],[34],[36],[37],[38],[39] When remineralizing effect of CPP-ACPF varnish was compared to fluoride varnish, superior efficacy was seen in four studies[11],[33],[36],[39] while two studies[34],[38] did not report a significant effect [Table 5].


  Discussion Top


This systematic review and meta-analysis underline the significant remineralizing effect of CPP-ACPF varnish compared to fluoride varnishes. Majority of in vitro studies[11],[33],[36],[39] have shown pronounced remineralizing effect of CPP-ACPF varnishes compared with other fluoride varnishes. However, few in vitro[34],[38] studies have shown contradictory results. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between CPP-ACPF varnish and other fluoride varnishes in improving the surface microhardness after remineralization during 7-day period.

Fluoride varnishes are more effective compared to other forms of delivery because of long contact periods resulting in high fluoride uptake and the formation of CaF2 deposits that act as fluoride reservoirs.[40] The CPP-ACP has been shown to interact with fluoride ions to produce an additive anticariogenic effect through the formation of CPP-stabilized amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate (ACFP) phase.[41],[42],[43],[44] The in situ study by Reynolds[45] showed that CPP-ACP plus fluoride formulation not only increased fluoride incorporation into plaque but also in subsurface enamel and substantially increased remineralization of subsurface lesions of enamel compared with fluoride alone. An in vitro study by Duraisamy et al. reported that demineralization inhibitory potential on the additive use of F − varnish + CPP-ACP was superior to fluoride varnish or CPP-ACP applied alone on the enamel of young permanent teeth.[46] The presence of the CPP-ACFP nanocomplexes in MI varnish has shown to be superior to fluoride alone in inhibiting enamel demineralization and promoting remineralization in a number of in situ and in vivo randomized controlled clinical trials.[8],[45],[47],[48],[49]

An in vitro study by Thakkar et al. found that CPP-ACPF varnish had significant demineralization inhibitory property compared to CPP-ACP paste and CPP-ACPF paste plus. Remineralizing effect did not differ significantly compared to both groups.[37] A previous study, which evaluated remineralizing efficiency of CPP-ACPF varnish and paste groups, showed increased values of calcium, phosphate contents, higher percent surface microhardness recovery, decrease in lesion depth, and mineral loss compared to paste groups.[28]

In the studies considered for review, fluoride varnishes contained a variety of combinations, which accounted for substantial clinical heterogeneity. CPP-ACPF varnish showed significantly higher demineralization inhibitory effect and greater amount of fluoride release as compared to fluor protector for a period of 1 month.[10] An in vitro study compared calcium phosphate-containing varnishes such as enamel pro, Clinpro, and CPP-ACPF varnish with other fluoride varnishes. The results showed that only CPP-ACPF varnish significantly inhibited demineralization than fluoride alone varnishes such as Duraphat and Profluorid.[11] Furthermore, CPP-ACPF varnish provided 130% greater inhibition when compared with the Duraphat fluoride-alone control.[11] The presence of the CPP-ACFP nanocomplexes and combination with fluoride would explain the superior ability of CPP-ACP varnish in inhibiting demineralization.

Remineralization potential on artificial enamel caries-like lesions in permanent teeth was significantly better with CPP-ACPF varnish compared to 5% sodium fluoride varnish[33],[36] and Clinpro varnish.[33] However, CPP-ACPF varnish did not achieve better remineralization of artificial enamel carious lesions when compared with Duraphat varnish.[34],[38] In a clinical trial by Obradović et al., CPP-ACPF varnish showed better remineralization of initial smooth surface caries lesions of primary teeth compared to conventional varnish with fluoride.[50] A systematic review and meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials by Tao et al. concluded that fluorides combined with CPP-ACP treatment produce significantly better remineralization of occlusal early caries lesions. For lesions on smooth surfaces, the meta-analysis showed no significant difference between using fluorides with CPP-ACP and using fluorides alone.[13] The CPP-ACFP are amorphous electroneutral nanocomplexes and their hydrodynamic radius allows rapid diffusion out of the varnish and is reported to enter the porosities of an enamel subsurface lesion through intraprismatic spaces favoring remineralization.[51]

Most varnishes in the market contain 5% NaF with an alcohol- and resin-based solution. The evaporation of the alcohol makes the system fast drying, and the resin functions to allow the fluoride to adhere to the teeth.[52] The most common resin additive is colophony, a resin derived from pine tree sap.[52] The main complaint about varnish, “stickiness,” and a noticeable film on the teeth is due to the carrier. The resin base in fluoride varnishes allows them to stick to tooth surfaces and stay for up to 24 h whereby fluoride is gradually released from the varnish and is taken up by the tooth enamel and dentin.[52] The strongly bound fluoride, incorporated onto the surface of the crystals of apatite, can reduce the solubility of the tooth mineral and hence inhibit demineralization due to acids generated by plaque bacteria.[53]Varnishes are preferred over other topical forms since they are user friendly and requires less handling and application time, When compared to gels, they are less likely to be ingested by young children. Varnishes are a successful strategy of prevention of caries in individuals with special requirements, such as those with developmental disabilities, because they stick to the tooth surface for longer lengths of time and requires less patient compliance.[54] A randomized trial by Huang et al. assessed the effectiveness of MI Paste Plus and PreviDent fluoride varnish for treatment of WSLs. The results showed no significant difference between two groups compared to a standard oral hygiene and toothpaste. This result can be attributed to the presentation of material in the form of varnish and not in toothpaste form.[4],[55]

A Cochrane review in 2016 suggested the superiority of resin-based fissure sealants over fluoride varnish applications for preventing occlusal caries in permanent molars, but the quality of evidence was low.[56] Fluoride varnish was shown to be less expensive than fissure sealant in a randomized clinical trial that used mobile dental clinics to target children with high caries risk. However, caries prevention was not significantly different when either strategy was used twice a year.[57] A cost-effectiveness analysis based on a clinical decision tree found the application of fluoride varnish as a cost-effective community strategy to prevent early childhood caries among rural children in nonfluoridated areas.[58] Cost-effectiveness of varnish against sealant was assessed over a period of 4 years in a school-based setting. Varnish appeared to be more cost-effective than sealants as the latter required expertise in application.[59] The application of varnish requires very little infrastructure, and it can be more readily applied in nontraditional settings (dental chair with illumination and fluid evacuation to maintain a dry field).[59] Even health-care providers with minimal training can also apply varnish.[59]

In vitro studies make possible the inexpensive and rapid yet sensitive assessment of any new inventions in a highly controlled environment representing a key component of product activity confirmation. However, major limitation is their inability to simulate the complex biological processes involved in caries. And, also the oral conditions that prevail in the mouth.[60] In in-situ and in -vitro investigations, quantitative measurements of mineral loss and lesion depth are regarded as standard primary outcomes for evaluating re and demineralization.[60] Surface microhardness is indirect technique which complements direct measures of mineral gain and loss.[60] There were very few studies which assessed mineral loss/gain in the present review.[11],[34],[35],[36]

Lesion depth defines the magnitude of penetration and damage from acid caused by varnishes. Transverse microradiography and polarized light microscopy are desirable methods[61] for direct assessment of lesion depth which was followed in only a few studies. Some studies had a small sample size. There was heterogeneity in the method of outcome assessment for lesion depth and mineral loss/gain, which limited meta-analysis for these parameters. Future research would benefit from a uniform method of assessment for mineral loss/gain and lesion depth using these products. Being cognizant about heterogeneity in reporting of methodology and evaluation, including the duration of follow-up and assessment, the evidence should be considered with caution. Future studies should be planned overcoming these limitations and dental association bodies should frame guidelines for reporting of efficacy of caries remineralizing agents in scientific studies which will help in review of articles and framing of clinical practice guidelines.


  Conclusion Top


CPP-ACPF varnish appears to be equally effective as other fluoride varnishes in remineralizing WSLs, but quality of evidence is low.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare that they have no conflicts of interest, real or perceived, financial or nonfinancial in this article.



 
  References Top

1.
Featherstone JD. The caries balance: The basis for caries management by risk assessment. Oral Health Prev Dent 2004;2 Suppl 1:259-64.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Marinho VC, Higgins JP, Sheiham A, Logan S. Fluoride toothpastes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;2003:CD002278.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Marinho VC, Worthington HV, Walsh T, Clarkson JE. Fluoride varnishes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;11 (7): CD002279.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Pithon MM, Dos Santos MJ, Andrade CS, Leão Filho JC, Braz AK, de Araujo RE, et al. Effectiveness of varnish with CPP-ACP in prevention of caries lesions around orthodontic brackets: An OCT evaluation. Eur J Orthod 2015;37:177-82.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Pollick H. The role of fluoride in the prevention of tooth decay. Pediatr Clin North Am 2018;65:923-40.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
ten Cate JM. Current concepts on the theories of the mechanism of action of fluoride. Acta Odontol Scand 1999;57:325-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Reynolds EC. Calcium phosphate-based remineralization systems: Scientific evidence? Aust Dent J 2008;53:268-73.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Bailey DL, Adams GG, Tsao CE, Hyslop A, Escobar K, Manton DJ, et al. Regression of post-orthodontic lesions by a remineralizing cream. J Dent Res 2009;88:1148-53.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Cecchini-259 J. New Generation of Fluoride Varnish is Coming to You! Oral Health Group; 2021. Available from: https://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/new-generation-fluoride-varnish-coming/. [Last accessed on 2021 Jul 07].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Attiguppe P, Malik N, Ballal S, Naik SV. CPP-ACP and fluoride: A synergism to combat caries. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12:120-5.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Shen P, Bagheri R, Walker GD, Yuan Y, Stanton DP, Reynolds C, et al. Effect of calcium phosphate addition to fluoride containing dental varnishes on enamel demineralization. Aust Dent J 2016;61:357-65.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Indrapriyadharshini K, Madan Kumar PD, Sharma K, Iyer K. Remineralizing potential of CPP-ACP in white spot lesions – A systematic review. Indian J Dent Res 2018;29:487-96.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
13.
Tao S, Zhu Y, Yuan H, Tao S, Cheng Y, Li J, et al. Efficacy of fluorides and CPP-ACP vs. fluorides monotherapy on early caries lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018;13:e0196660.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Imani MM, Safaei M, Afnaniesfandabad A, Moradpoor H, Sadeghi M, Golshah A, et al. Efficacy of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACPF for prevention and remineralization of white spot lesions in orthodontic patients: A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials. Acta Inform Med 2019;27:199-204.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Internet]. Training.cochrane.org. 2021 [cited 29 January 2022]. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):336-41.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Patak AA, Naim HA, Hidayat R. Taking Mendeley as multimedia-based application in academic writing. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol 2016;6:557-60.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Rooney A. Extending a Risk-of-Bias Approach to Address In vitro Studies. National Toxicology Program Office of Health Assessment and Translation. Bing.com; 2015. Available from: https://www.bing.com/search?q=rooney+andrew%2C+ohat+tool&cvid=f7e3f48f23674accb19a1f442e6740c1&pglt=43&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=HCTS. [Last accessed on 2021 Feb 09].  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Krithikadatta J, Gopikrishna V, Datta M. CRIS Guidelines (Checklist for Reporting In-vitro Studies): A concept note on the need for standardized guidelines for improving quality and transparency in reporting in-vitro studies in experimental dental research. J Conserv Dent 2014;17:301-4.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
20.
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Review Manager Web (RevMan Web) [Computer Program]. Version 1.22.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; [Internet]. 2020. Available from: http://revman.cochrane.org. [Last accessed on 2022 Jan 29].  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Huedo-Medina TB, Sánchez-Meca J, Marín-Martínez F, Botella J. Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods 2006;11:193-206.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557-60.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Abufarwa M, Noureldin A, Azimaie T, Campbell PM, Buschang PH. Preventive effects of carbon dioxide laser and casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate fluoride varnish on enamel demineralization: A comparative, in vitro study. J Investig Clin Dent 2019;10:e12400.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Abufarwa M, Noureldin A, Campbell PM, Buschang PH. The longevity of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate fluoride varnish's preventative effects: Assessment of white spot lesion formation. Angle Orthod 2019;89:10-5.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Girish Babu KL, Subramaniam P, Teleti S. Remineralization potential of varnish containing casein phosphopeptides-amorphous calcium phosphate with fluoride and varnish containing only fluoride: A comparative study. Saudi J Oral Sci 2018;5:35-40.  Back to cited text no. 26
  [Full text]  
27.
Babu KL, Subramaniam P, Teleti S. Effect of varnish containing casein phosphopeptides-amorphous calcium phosphate and fluoride on surface microhardness of enamel – An in vitro study. Saudi J Oral Sci 2020;7:29-34.  Back to cited text no. 27
  [Full text]  
28.
Bakry AS, Abbassy MA. Increasing the efficiency of CPP-ACP to remineralize enamel white spot lesions. J Dent 2018;76:52-7.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Bapat SA, Shashikiran ND, Gugawad S, Gaonkar N, Taur S, Hadakar S, et al. In-vitro comparison of anti-microbial efficacy and enamel microhardness after application of two types of fluoride varnishes. J Clin Diag Res 2020;14:ZC05-8.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Fibryanto E, Elline D, Indah DP, Hidayat A. The effect of topical remineralization agents on surface microhardness of enamel (ex vivo research). J Int Dent Med Res 2020;13:964-8.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Kamal D, Hassanein H, Elkassas D, Hamza H. Complementary remineralizing effect of self-assembling peptide (P11-4) with CPP-ACPF or fluoride: An in vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent 2020;12:e161-8.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Majithia U, Venkataraghavan K, Choudhary P, Trivedi K, Shah S, Virda M. Comparative evaluation of application of different fluoride varnishes on artificial early enamel lesion: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2016;27:521-7.  Back to cited text no. 32
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
33.
Ramadevi RP, Jayasudha K, Arun E, Madhan CG, Jayanthi M, Aravinth V. An in-vitro comparative evaluation of two different fluoride varnishes in the remineralization of artificial caries lesions on human primary and permanent teeth. Univ J Surg Surg Spec 2020;6:1-5.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Mohd Said SN, Ekambaram M, Yiu CK. Effect of different fluoride varnishes on remineralization of artificial enamel carious lesions. Int J Paediatr Dent 2017;27:163-73.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Sleibi A, Tappuni A, Mills D, Davis GR, Baysan A. Comparison of the efficacy of different fluoride varnishes on dentin remineralization during a critical pH exposure using quantitative X-ray microtomography. Oper Dent 2018;43:E308-16.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Shen P, McKeever A, Walker GD, Yuan Y, Reynolds C, Fernando JR, et al. Remineralization and fluoride uptake of white spot lesions under dental varnishes. Aust Dent J 2020;65:278-85.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Thakkar PJ, Badakar CM, Hugar SM, Hallikerimath S, Patel PM, Shah P. An in vitro comparison of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate paste, casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate paste with fluoride and casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate varnish on the inhibition of demineralization and promotion of remineralization of enamel. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2017;35:312-8.  Back to cited text no. 37
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
38.
Üstün N, Aktören O. Analysis of efficacy of the self-assembling peptide-based remineralization agent on artificial enamel lesions. Microsc Res Tech 2019;82:1065-72.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Varma V, Hegde KS, Bhat SS, Sargod SS, Rao HA. Comparative evaluation of remineralization potential of two varnishes containing CPP-ACP and Tricalcium phosphate: An in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12:233-6.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Bayrak S, Tuloglu N, Bicer H, Sen Tunc E. Effect of fluoride varnish containing CPP-ACP on preventing enamel erosion. Scanning 2017;2017:1897825.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Choi HJ, Choi YC, Kim KC, Choi SC. Remineralization depth of CPP-ACP on demineralization human enamel in vitro. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent 2008;35:278-86.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Reynolds EC, Cain CJ, Webber FL, Black CL, Riley PF, Johnson IH, et al. Anticariogenicity of calcium phosphate complexes of tryptic casein phosphopeptides in the rat. J Dent Res 1995;74:1272-9.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Reynolds EC. Anticariogenic complexes of amorphous calcium phosphate stabilized by casein phosphopeptides: A review. Spec Care Dentist 1998;18:8-16.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Cross KJ, Huq NL, Stanton DP, Sum M, Reynolds EC. NMR studies of a novel calcium, phosphate and fluoride delivery vehicle-alpha (S1)-casein (59-79) by stabilized amorphous calcium fluoride phosphate nanocomplexes. Biomaterials 2004;25:5061-9.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Reynolds EC, Cai F, Cochrane NJ, Shen P, Walker GD, Morgan MV, et al. Fluoride and casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate. J Dent Res 2008;87:344-8.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
Duraisamy V, Xavier A, Nayak UA, Reddy V, Rao AP. An in vitro evaluation of the demineralization inhibitory effect of F(-) varnish and casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate on enamel in young permanent teeth. J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2015;7:S513-7.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Morgan MV, Adams GG, Bailey DL, Tsao CE, Fischman SL, Reynolds EC. The anticariogenic effect of sugar-free gum containing CPP-ACP nanocomplexes on approximal caries determined using digital bitewing radiography. Caries Res 2008;42:171-84.  Back to cited text no. 47
    
48.
Srinivasan N, Kavitha M, Loganathan SC. Comparison of the remineralization potential of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACP with 900 ppm fluoride on eroded human enamel: An in situ study. Arch Oral Biol 2010;55:541-4.  Back to cited text no. 48
    
49.
Shen P, Manton DJ, Cochrane NJ, Walker GD, Yuan Y, Reynolds C, et al. Effect of added calcium phosphate on enamel remineralization by fluoride in a randomized controlled in situ trial. J Dent 2011;39:518-25.  Back to cited text no. 49
    
50.
Obradović M, Dolić O, Sukara S, Vojinović J. The role of protective varnishes in the treatment of initial caries. Contemp Mater 2016;7:93-8.  Back to cited text no. 50
    
51.
Cochrane NJ, Cai F, Huq NL, Burrow MF, Reynolds EC. New approaches to enhanced remineralization of tooth enamel. J Dent Res 2010;89:1187-97.  Back to cited text no. 51
    
52.
Picano L. Fluoride Varnishes: What is the Difference, and Which One is Best? Dental Economics; 2020. Available from: https://www.dentaleconomics.com/science-tech/cosmetic-dentistry-and-whitening/article/14173399/fluoride-varnishes-what-is-the-difference-and-which-one-is-best. [Last accessed on 2021 Jul 10].  Back to cited text no. 52
    
53.
Tewari A, Chawla HS, Utreja A. Comparative evaluation of the role of NaF, APF & Duraphat topical fluoride applications in the prevention of dental caries – A 2 ½ years study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 1991;8:28-35.  Back to cited text no. 53
[PUBMED]    
54.
Munshi AK, Reddy NN, Shetty V. A comparative evaluation of three fluoride varnishes: An in-vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2001;19:92-102.  Back to cited text no. 54
[PUBMED]    
55.
Huang GJ, Roloff-Chiang B, Mills BE, Shalchi S, Spiekerman C, Korpak AM, et al. Effectiveness of MI Paste Plus and PreviDent fluoride varnish for treatment of white spot lesions: A randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;143:31-41.  Back to cited text no. 55
    
56.
Kashbour W, Gupta P, Worthington HV, Boyers D. Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;11:CD003067.  Back to cited text no. 56
    
57.
Chestnutt IG, Hutchings S, Playle R, Morgan-Trimmer S, Fitzsimmons D, Aawar N, et al. Seal or Varnish? A randomised controlled trial to determine the relative cost and effectiveness of pit and fissure sealant and fluoride varnish in preventing dental decay. Health Technol Assess 2017;21:1-256.  Back to cited text no. 57
    
58.
Zaror C, Muñoz-Millán P, Espinoza-Espinoza G, Vergara-González C, Martínez-Zapata MJ. Cost-effectiveness of adding fluoride varnish to a preventive protocol for early childhood caries in rural children with no access to fluoridated drinking water. J Dent 2020;98:103374.  Back to cited text no. 58
    
59.
Neidell M, Shearer B, Lamster IB. Cost-effectiveness analysis of dental sealants versus fluoride varnish in a school-based setting. Caries Res 2016;50 Suppl 1:78-82.  Back to cited text no. 59
    
60.
White DJ. The application of in vitro models to research on demineralization and remineralization of the teeth. Adv Dent Res 1995;9:175-93.  Back to cited text no. 60
    
61.
White DJ, Faller RV, Bowman WD. Demineralization and remineralization evaluation techniques-added considerations. J Dent Res 1992;71:929-33.  Back to cited text no. 61
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5]



 

Top
 
 
Search
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed446    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded79    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal