Skip to content

Erosion protection benefits of stabilized SnF2 dentifrice versus an arginine–sodium monofluorophosphate dentifrice: results from in vitro and in situ clinical studies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)533-540
Number of pages8
JournalClinical Oral Investigations
Issue number2
Early online date1 Aug 2016
DateAccepted/In press - 7 Jul 2016
DateE-pub ahead of print - 1 Aug 2016
DatePublished (current) - Mar 2017



The aim of these investigations was to assess the ability of two fluoride dentifrices to protect against the initiation and progression of dental erosion using a predictive in vitro erosion cycling model and a human in situ erosion prevention clinical trial for verification of effectiveness.

Materials and methods

A stabilized stannous fluoride (SnF2) dentifrice (0.454 % SnF2 + 0.077 % sodium fluoride [NaF]; total F = 1450 ppm F) [dentifrice A] and a sodium monofluorophosphate [SMFP]/arginine dentifrice (1.1 % SMFP + 1.5 % arginine; total F = 1450 ppm F) [dentifrice B] were tested in a 5-day in vitro erosion cycling model and a 10-day randomized, controlled, double-blind, two-treatment, four-period crossover in situ clinical trial. In each study, human enamel specimens were exposed to repetitive product treatments using a standardized dilution of test products followed by erosive acid challenges in a systematic fashion.


Both studies demonstrated statistically significant differences between the two products, with dentifrice A providing significantly better enamel protection in each study. In vitro, dentifrice A provided a 75.8 % benefit over dentifrice B (p < 0.05, ANOVA), while after 10 days in the in situ model, dentifrice A provided 93.9 % greater protection versus dentifrice B (p < 0.0001, general linear mixed model).


These results support the superiority of stabilized SnF2 dentifrices for protecting human teeth against the initiation and progression of dental erosion.

Clinical relevance

Stabilized SnF2 dentifrices may provide more significant benefits to consumers than conventional fluoride dentifrices.

    Research areas

  • erosion, toothwear, dentifrice, clinical trial

Download statistics

No data available



  • Full-text PDF (final published version)

    Rights statement: This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Springer at Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.

    Final published version, 533 KB, PDF document

    Licence: CC BY


View research connections

Related faculties, schools or groups