Evidence Hub

Remineralizing Treatments for Dental Erosion and Sensitivity in Patients Suffering from Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD): Randomized Clinical Trial

A. Scribante, A. Pardo, M. Pascadopoli, F. Biagi, A. Schiepatti, Valentina Giammona, M. Vecchio, Christian Alquati et al.

Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025

15 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic condition that causes an abrupt decrease in salivary pH in the oral cavity, which can lead to demineralization, erosion, hypersensitivity, functional impairment, and possibly fracture of dental elements. The aim of this clinical study is to compare two types of treatment in patients with dental erosion diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux. Methods: Thirty patients were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. Each patient underwent clinical evaluation and esophageal pH measurement, in order to diagnose GERD. After an initial examination and assessment by an experienced dentist, the Trial group (15 patients) was assigned to home treatment with a zinc hydroxyapatite-based toothpaste and a hydroxyapatite-based paste, while the Control group (15 patients) was assigned to home treatment with zinc hydroxyapatite-based toothpaste only. The following indices were measured: Basic Erosive Wear Examination Index (BEWE); Schiff Air Index (SAI); Plaque Index (PI); and Bleeding Score (BS). Each index was assessed at T0 during the first visit, one month (T1), three months (T2), six months (T3), nine months (T4), and 12 months (T5). The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to analyze the normality of the data, while Friedman’s test followed by Dunn’s post hoc test were used to compare the two groups (significance threshold: p 0.05). However, an improvement in dentin sensitivity and BS was observed. Plaque control also…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 15 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free