Taking this into consideration, children have been submitted to preventive programs based on regular plaque control by professional prophylaxis, which aims to compensate for poor toothbrushing.11�C16 When regularly performed, professional prophylaxis may significantly reduce the progression of dental caries.11�C15 One method for performing this procedure is the use of sodium bicarbonate. selleck chem inhibitor Investigations comparing the effectiveness of prophylaxis using sodium bicarbonate with that performed using rubber cup and pumice reveal that sodium bicarbonate removes dental plaque more effectively, especially in pit and fissure regions.16,17 Tooth wear could be a possible adverse effect of the regular use of sodium bicarbonate.

Thus, several studies have been conducted to quantify the amount of tooth structure removed in each session of professional prophylaxis using sodium bicarbonate.18�C20 In general, authors agree that sodium bicarbonate has a slight effect on intact enamel.18�C20 However, these studies evaluated the dental surface immediately after the procedure, while doubts still remain concerning the protective capacity of the oral environment due to the presence of saliva and/or fluoride. Oral fluids may offer some protection, even when considering the loss of tooth structure by abrasion caused by the mechanical action of sodium bicarbonate under water pressure. Saliva is rich in minerals and proteins, it is supersaturated with calcium and phosphate ions, and it lubricates the teeth.21 Thus, saliva acts against demineralization and may be able to recover the slight mineral loss of enamel caused by prophylaxis using sodium bicarbonate.

Furthermore, fluoride can increase the rate of re-mineralization due to its mechanism of action.8,22 However, it is not known whether fluoride may influence the redeposition of minerals in case of abrasion of enamel surfaces. Considering such aspects, this in situ study aimed to evaluate the effect of saliva, whether associated or not with fluoride, on enamel that had previously been subjected to prophylaxis using sodium bicarbonate. MATERIAL AND METHODS Experimental design This in situ study involved a crossover, blind design performed in two phases of 4 hours,20 with a wash-out period of 7 days. The groups under study were: G1��treatment with sodium bicarbonate jet in vitro and saliva exposure for 4h in situ, and G2��treatment with sodium bicarbonate jet in vitro, 0.

2% NaF rinse during the first minute and saliva exposure for 4h in situ. Each phase corresponded to one group: G1 or G2. Ten healthy adult volunteers living in the same fluoridated area (0.7 ppm) with a mean age of 28 years (range Brefeldin_A 23�C35 years) and normal salivary flow rate took part in this study after signing an informed, written consent, approved by the IRB of Bauru Dental School, University of S?o Paulo. They wore acrylic palatal appliances, each containing two dental enamel blocks (Figure 1). Figure 1.