Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to systematically review and analyse the difference in efficacy of stannous fluoride toothpaste formulations in comparison to other fluoridated toothpastes without stannous fluoride. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A search strategy was developed to answer the study question and was performed in PubMed-Medline databases. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled clinical trials comparing stannous fluoride toothpaste formulations with other fluoridated toothpastes not containing stannous fluoride. RESULTS: The search in PubMed-Medline databases resulted in 384 articles; 23 articles were downloaded for review, 16 articles were included in the report and six could be used for meta-analysis. All studies were randomised controlled clinical trials that compared clinical outcomes between toothpastes with stannous fluoride combinations and toothpastes with only fluoride. The overall results of the 16 studies favoured the stannous fluoride formulations. However, in a meta-analysis of the randomised controlled clinical trials, it was demonstrated that stannous fluoride toothpaste formulations provided significantly better outcomes based on the Gingival Index (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.20, -0.07, P = 0.0001), but not the Modified Gingival Index (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.7, 0.09, P = 0.13). PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The antibacterial properties of stannous seem to provide favourable results when formulated with a fluoridated toothpaste. This systematic review highlights the lack of homogenous research available to rigorously compare stannous fluoride toothpaste formulations with other fluoridated toothpastes without stannous fluoride.