title: A randomised crossover trial to compare the potential of stannous fluoride and essential oil mouth rinses to induce tooth and tongue staining.
abstract: This study compared the staining potential of two experimental amine fluoride/stannous fluoride mouth rinses (A and B), a phenolic/essential oil rinse (C) and a negative control, water, rinse (D). The study was a single centre, randomized, single-blind, four treatment crossover study design among healthy participants. Prior to each study period, participants received a dental prophylaxis. On the Monday of each period, subjects suspended oral hygiene, and under supervision, rinsed with the allocated mouth rinse immediately followed by a warm black tea solution at hourly intervals eight times a day for 4 days. On Friday, the area and intensity of staining on the teeth, the primary outcome measure and dorsum of tongue were assessed. This regimen was repeated for all the three subsequent treatment periods. Rinse B produced less stain than rinse A, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.20). Rinse B produced significantly more stain than rinse C (p < 0.05) and D (p < 0.001). For tongue staining, rinse B produced significantly more staining than D (p < 0.01) but not A or C. Overall, all test rinses produced more staining than placebo with an overall pattern for more staining with stannous formulations. Individuals using stannous or phenolic/essential oil mouth rinse formulations should be advised of the possible staining side effect and that this can be easily removed by a professional dental cleaning.
authors: Restorative Dentistry, School of Oral and Dental Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. N.X.West@Bristol.ac.uk
authors: Nicola Xania
authors: NX
authors: West
authors: Martin
authors: M
authors: Addy
authors: Robert
authors: R
authors: Newcombe
authors: Emma
authors: E
authors: Macdonald
authors: Alison
authors: A
authors: Chapman
authors: Maria
authors: M
authors: Davies
authors: John
authors: J
authors: Moran
authors: Nicholas
authors: N
authors: Claydon
references: Scand J Dent Res. 1971;79(2):119-25
references: 5280246
references: J Periodontal Res. 1979 Sep;14(5):411-7
references: 161783
references: Br Dent J. 1985 Nov 9;159(9):281-5
references: 3864472
references: J Clin Periodontol. 1983 Jan;10(1):89-99
references: 6572638
references: J Periodontol. 2007 Jul;78(7):1218-28
references: 17608576
references: Int Dent J. 1995 Jun;45(3):177-84
references: 7558356
references: J Clin Periodontol. 1995 Dec;22(12):923-8
references: 8613560
references: J Clin Periodontol. 2006 May;33(5):334-9
references: 16634954
references: J Periodontal Res. 1970;5(2):79-83
references: 4254172
references: J Dent Res. 1993 Aug;72(8):1194-7
references: 8360362
references: J Am Dent Assoc. 1968 Oct;77(4):849-55
references: 5244497
references: Int J Dent Hyg. 2005 May;3(2):59-63
references: 16451383
references: Acta Odontol Scand. 1977;35(5):247-50
references: 335772
references: Br Dent J. 1985 Nov 23;159(10):331-4
references: 3865675
references: J Periodontal Res. 1979 Sep;14(5):403-10
references: 161782
references: J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Jan;31(1):1-6
references: 15058366
references: J Clin Periodontol. 1997 Feb;24(2):115-8
references: 9062858
references: J Dent. 2003 Aug;31(6):415-22
references: 12878024
references: Int J Dent Hyg. 2004 Aug;2(3):122-6
references: 16451475
references: Br Dent J. 2001 Mar 24;190(6):309-16
references: 11325156
references: Int J Dent Hyg. 2005 Feb;3(1):25-30
references: 16451374
references: J Clin Periodontol. 2008 Jul;35(7):614-20
references: 18422695
references: Clin Oral Investig. 2001 Jun;5(2):89-95
references: 11480815
references: J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Jan;31(1):7-11
references: 15058367