Title: 0621 - Dental Plaque, Gingival and Subgingival Impact of Manual Toothbrushes Use
Renzo Ccahuana-Vásquez (Presenter)
Procter and Gamble Service GmbH
Julie Grender, Procter & Gamble Company
Erinn Conde, Procter & Gamble Company
Pam Cunningham, Procter & Gamble Company
David Ramsey, Procter & Gamble Company
Sancai Xie, Procter & Gamble Company
Chris Haught, Procter & Gamble Company
Jiazhen Wang, Procter & Gamble Company
Sherry Tansky, Procter & Gamble Company
Junjun Chen, Procter & Gamble Company
Lijuan Li, Procter & Gamble Company
Tom Huggins, Procter & Gamble Company
Jeffery Milleman, Salus Research Inc
Ralf Adam, Procter & Gamble Service GmbH
Objectives: This experimental clinical study assessed changes in subgingival plaque virulence, and reduction of gingivitis and plaque by two manual toothbrushes with different bristle technology.
Methods: This was an examiner-blind, three-week, two-treatment, parallel, randomized study design evaluating a manual toothbrush with regular bristles (Oral-B Indicator – Positive Control) vs. tapered bristles (Oral-B Indicator Super Thin – Test brush). Sixty subjects with moderate gingivitis and plaque participated in this study. Subgingival plaque samples were taken for bacteria quantification (D-Alanine) and plaque virulence (ATP and TLR2) analyses at Baseline and after three weeks of product use. Subjects were evaluated for gingivitis using the Modified Gingival Index (MGI) and the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) and for plaque using the Turesky-Modified Quigley-Hein Plaque Index (TQHPI). Both groups used standard fluoridated toothpaste. Toothbrushing was performed for one minute twice per day. Statistical analyses were carried out using an analysis of covariance and Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results: Both brushes significantly reduced gingivitis, gingival bleeding and presence of dental plaque vs baseline after 3 weeks of use (p<0.05). No differences were observed between the brushes (p>0.05). The subgingival plaque evaluation showed that the control brush significantly reduced bacterial quantity (p=0.006) and ATP (p=0.0409) relative to Baseline, while the test brush did not (p>0.2). In contrast, the test brush significantly reduced the levels of TLR2 (p=0.002) relative to Baseline whereas the control brush did not (p=0.148). There were no significant differences between the brushes for bacterial quantity, ATP and TLR 2 endpoints (p>0.05).
Conclusions: Both manual brushes showed similar clinical performance for the gingivitis and plaque reduction. There were some brush-specific changes in the subgingival plaque virulence that can provide insights into mechanism of action.
The submitter must disclose the names of the organizations with which any author have a relationship, the nature of the relationship, and the clinical or research area involved. The following is submitted: R A Ccahuana-Vasquez, JM Grender, E Conde, PA Cunningham, D Ramsey, S Xie, C Haught, J Wang, S Tansky, J Chen, L Li, T Huggins, and, R Adam are employees of Procter and Gamble Company