Download VADEMECUM

VADEMECUM
DENTAID’S MISSION
Dentaid, founded in 1980, is a pioneer oral research company whose goal is to improve oral health
throughout society, by providing the best scientifically-backed solutions to consumers around the
globe.
Our commitment to research and innovation and our strong working relationship with dental and
pharmaceutical professionals and major European and American universities have contributed to our
status as world-wide leaders.
Advancing through
research
We are one of the few European laboratories
specialised in the microbiological research
of dental biofilms. By combining state-ofthe-art technology and highly qualified staff,
we are able to consistently guarantee quality
levels in all of our brands.
2
EUROPE
Andorra
Belgium
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Holland
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Moldova
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Ukraine
United Kingdom
In search of new
challenges
To cover the population’s oral hygiene needs,
we are constantly working to innovate by
creating new products and improving our
existing ones.
To innovate, our advanced facilities are
exclusively
devoted
to
research
and
development.
Our business strategy is based on a strong
commitment to continuous research and
development of high quality, innovative
products. Through this commitment, we have
become what we are today: a multinational
leader in oral health.
AMERICA
Chile
Colombia
Dominican Republic
Guatemala
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
DENTAID is present in more than 50 countries
ASIA
Cambodja
Iran
Japan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Myanmar
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
UAE
subsidiaries
AFRICA
Benin
Burkina Faso
Egypt
Libya
Morocco
Mauritus
Niger
Senegal
Togo
Tunisie
3
TOOTHBRUSHES
Toothbrushes
Monotip
Attack zone disrupts even the
most resistant dental biofilm.
Protective cap
Keeps filaments together
and in optimal conditions
while isolating them from
external contact.
Filaments
Made of end-rounded,
textured Tynex® preventing
damage to enamel and gum.
Brushing surface
Different formats for accessing
interdental spaces in every
situation.
Brush head
Small and rounded for easy
brushing and better access to
hard-to-reach areas.
Handle
Ergonomic and adaptable,
can be bent to the form of
your mouth.
4
TOOTHBRUSHES
PERIO
ULTRASOFT
For gently cleaning delicate gums
Specifically designed for cleaning fixed
orthodontic appliances
Very gentle cleaning for cases of
extreme sensitivity
Specific cleaning for periodontal
treatments or wide spaces
MEDIUM
JUNIOR
ACCESS
MEDIUM
SENSITIVE
Small brush head with soft filaments
ACCESS
ORTHODONTIC
ORTHODONTIC
GINGIVAL
ACCESS
SOFT
HARD
Normal brush head with hard filaments
Normal brush head with medium strength
filaments
Child-size brush head with soft filaments
Small brush head with medium strength
filaments
For gently cleaning sensitive teeth
Small brush head specifically designed
for cleaning fixed orthodontic appliances
SURGICAL
SOFT
Normal brush head with soft filaments
Daily Care
Extremely gentle cleaning after surgical
interventions
MONOTIP
Complete
For efficiently cleaning braces,
prostheses and implants
5
CEPILLOS
VITIS IMPLANT
Innovation
implant
applied to implant
hygiene
The most complete and specialised product range
for hygiene, care and protection of dental implants
Cutting edge toothbrushes, designed specifically for disrupting oral biofilm around implants with the
utmost precision, penetrate the peri-implant sulcus, to mechanically break up the biofilm, enhancing
the effects of antimicrobial agents.
situations
• Small brush head that with soft
Tynex® filaments efficiently
reaches areas around implants
that are normally hard to clean.
• Provides easy access to lingual
surfaces of the anterior and
posterior sections of the dental
arches.
IMPLANT SULCULAR
IMPLANT ANGULAR
Special
6
• Small, rounded brush head for
daily brushing, care and hygiene
in people with dental implants.
• Extra-soft Tynex® filaments
provide gentle, but deep,
cleaning of gums when
mucogingival problems are
present.
• Small, narrow and linear brush
head with soft Tynex® filaments
arranged in two rows.
• Specifically indicated for
cleaning the gingival and/or
peri-implant sulcus.
Specifically designed for cleaning
implants and prostheses
IMPLANT MONOTIP
IMPLANT BRUSH
Small brush head for gently
cleaning mouths with implants
Specifically designed for cleaning
implants, prostheses and braces
• Small brush head.
• Tynex® filaments arranged in a
monotuft.
• Designed specifically to access
very small spaces that require
maximum cleaning precision of
implant-supported prostheses.
DENTAL FLOSS & TAPE
SOFT WAXED
DENTAL FLOSS
WAXED DENTAL TAPE
WITH FUORIDE AND MINT
WAXED DENTAL FLOSS
dental floss & tape
Waxed dental floss
Easy-glide cleaning.
Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque.
Ideal for creating good flossing habits.
•
•
•
Waxed dental tape with fluoride and mint
Cleaning that strengthens enamel.
Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque.
Fluoride strengthens enamel.
Contains sodium fluoride.
•
•
•
•
Soft waxed dental floss with fluoride and mint
Gentle cleaning in people with braces, implants and prosthetics.
Eliminates interdental bacterial plaque.
Textured floss expands when in contact with saliva.
Contains sodium fluoride.
•
•
•
•
7
WHITENING
whitening
Effectively whitens and prevents
dental sensitivity
Repairing and
Whitening action
- Fill irregular tooth surfaces.
• Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles
Natural tooth element that integrates and forms a
protective, wash-resistant coating.
- Repair tooth enamel, making surface smoother and
brighter
.
- From a protective coating to
prevent dental sensitivity.
DENTAID
technology
nanorepair ®
NEW
Mouthwash
0,45%
0,0125%
1,10%
0,172%
Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles
Repair dental enamel for a smoother and brighter surface
Sodium fluoride
Reinforces enamel
Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)
Removes stains from the surface of tooth enamel and
prevents their formation
✓
✓
Tetrapotassium pyrophosphate
Sodium tripolyphosphate
Sodium hexametaphosphate
Delay or prevent calculus formation: crystallization of
bacterial plaque (oral biofilm).
Remove stains and prevent their formation.
✓
✓
Polishes and smoothes dental enamel without damaging it.
Gives surface a smoother and brighter finish.
Restores the natural shine of teeth.
✓
_
Perlite
Presentations
8
Toothpaste
100ml
500ml
CEPILLOS
GINIGIVAL
•
•
•
•
Reduces plaque (biofilm) build-up
For delicate gums
Reinforces enamel
Protects gums
Cetylpyridinium chloride
Reduces biofilm accumulation
Sodium fluoride
Reinforces enamel
Permethol
Promotes healthy gums
Pro-vitamin B5 (Panthenol)
Protects and gums
Zinc lactate
Increases the substantivity of CPC, lengthening its
activity.
Presentations
VITIS GINGIVAL KIT
· 30 ml VITIS gingival mouthwash
· 15 ml VITIS gingival toothpaste
· VITIS gingival toothbrush
Toothpaste
Mouthwash
0.05%
0.05%
1450ppm
_____
0.25%
0.1%
1.0%
0.5%
0.25%
0.14%
100ml
150ml/500ml
REFERENCES:
1.García V, Rioboo M, Serrano J, Herrera D, SANZ M. Plaque Inhibitory Effect of a 0.05% Cetyl-Pyridinium Chloride Mouthrinse. Journal of Dental Research 2008; 87 (special issue).
2.Sanz M, Herrera D. Clinical and microbiological efficacy on an antimicrobial mouthrinse containing 0,05% CPC in patients with gingivitis. International Journal of Dental
Hygiene (accepted sept 2010)
9
ORTHODONTIC
•
•
•
•
•
Reinforces enamel
Keeps gums healthy
Reduces plaque (biofilm) build-up
Prevents bad breath
Helps keep braces clean
VITIS ORTHODONTIC KIT
· 30 ml VITIS orthodontic mouthwash
· 15 ml VITIS orthodontic toothpaste
· VITIS orthodontic toothbrush
Toothpaste Mouthwash
Cetylpyridinium chloride Reduces biofilm accumulation
0.05%
1450ppm
226ppm
Sodium fluoride
Reinforces enamel
Aloe Vera
Promotes healthy gums
0.126%
0.05%
Promotes healthy gums
0.10%
0.10%
Allantoin
Presentations
100ml
REFERENCES:
10
0.05%
150ml/500ml
VITIS orthodontic
wax
Creates a
protective
coating that
protects against
rubbing caused
by orthodontic
appliances.
2 units
VITIS orthodontic
tablets
Prevent plaque buildup and bad odour.
Get rid of stains from
tea, coffee, smoking.
Do not harm metallic
parts of orthodontic
appliances.
32 units
1. Herrera D, Pérez L, Escudero N, Alonso B, Serrano J, Martin C, Sanz M. Evaluation of Cetylpyridinium chloride. Formulations in orthodontic patients: Periodontal outcomes.
Comunication at IADR Munich Sept 2009.
0,12%
PERIO·AID 0,12% MOUTHWASH
• Efficiently fights dental biofilm.
• Helps maintain the health of your gums.
• Before and after dental care
PERIO·AID 0,12% GEL
• For implant and
periodontal maintenance.
PERIO·AID 0,12% SPRAY
• For hard-to-reach areas (tonsils, tongue dorsum) or in people
with special needs.
Mouthwash
Spray
Gel
Chlorhexidine digluconate
Efficiently fights dental biofilm
0.12%
0.12%
0.12%
Cetylpyridinium chloride
Reduces biofilm accumulation
0.05%
0.05%
_____
150ml/500ml
5000ml
50ml
75ml
Presentations
11
MAINTENANCE
First scientifically endorsed formulation for oral biofilm control with
superior efficacy
NOT ALL CHLOREHXIDINE FORMULATIONS ARE ALIKE*
PERIO·AID MAINTENANCE MOUTHWASH
• Prevents the accumulation of dental biofilm.
• After dental care.
• Helps maintain the health of your gums.
Mouthwash
Chlorhexidine digluconate
Efficiently fights dental biofilm
0.05%
Cetylpyridinium chloride
Reduces biofilm accumulation
0.05%
Presentations
12
150ml/500ml
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 Mucositis in Irradiated Cancer Patients: Effects of an Antiseptic Mouthrinse
I. LANZ. S, , S. SANTOS, A. OxCONNOR, E. LANZ S, and M. SANZ, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain, Hospital 12 de octubre, Madrid, Spain. Mucositis in
Irradiated Cancer Patients: Effects of an Antiseptic Mouthrinse. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010 Sep 1; 15 (5): e732-8
Objective: To assess the effects of a mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine (CHX, 0.12%) and cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC, 0.05%) and no alcohol, in irradiated
cancer patients.
Material and Methods: Consecutive patients, irradiated as part of the therapy of head-and-neck cancer, were selected. Patients were orally assessed with regards
to the presence and degree of mucositis (0-4), plaque and gingival (dichotomous) indices, amount and pH of saliva, and presence of different micro-organisms,
including Candida sp. after culturing of mucosa, tongue and subgingival samples. Patients were randomised to use, twice per day, a test or placebo mouthrinse,
and were evaluated after 2 and 4 weeks. Groups were compared in the changes in outcome variables by means of non-parametric test, either chi-square for
dichotomous variables in contingency tables, or Wilcoxon test.
Results: A total of 36 consecutive patients (32 male and 4 female patients) were screened for inclusion. Among them, 31 patients completed the 2-weeks visit, and
26 the 4-weeks visit. Most patients developed mucositis in both groups, and no differences were detected between groups after 2 (p=0.35) or 4 weeks (p=0.69)
or in the comparison 2-4 weeks (p=0.53). With regards to the degree of mucositis, no significant differences were detected, although the mean increase baseline-2
weeks was higher in the placebo group (1.81 versus 1.20). No differences were detected in other clinical variables, except a higher reduction baseline-2 weeks
of plaque (p=0.06) and a lower level of gingival bleeding at 2 weeks (p=0.08), at sampled sites, both favoring the test group. The test group showed a higher
reduction (p=0.09) in the amounts of Candida sp. baseline-4 weeks and 2 weeks-4 weeks in the mucosa sample.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the small sample size, this study suggests some improvements of clinical and microbiological parameters in patients irradiated
for head-and-neck cancer. *Supported by Dentaid.
2 Differences in antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinse formulations: An in vitro contact test and salivary
bacterial counts study
D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. Santacruz, S. Santos, M. Masdevall, M. Sanz: Differences in antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chorhexidine mouthrinse
formulations: an in vitro contact test and salivary bacterial counts study. J. Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 307-314.
Aim: To evaluate the in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial activity of four commercial 0.12% chlorhexidine mouthrinses.
Material and Methods: The in vitro antimicrobial activity test consisted in a modified contact test where 20 selected bacterial species were tested during 1 min
with each test product. After the contact, the inoculum was cultured, and the results were expressed in terms of survival/resistance and the percentage of survival
as compared to a saline control. The in vivo test consisted of a double-blind, randomized, cross-over salivary bacterial counts study, 10 volunteers rinsed during 1
min with each tested product. Saliva samples were obtained before rinsing, and after 5 min, and 1, 3, 5 and 7 h. These samples were cultured both aerobically and
anaerobically. Percentages of survival, in regard to baseline, were calculated for each time point. Comparisons among products were tested using ANOVA and
selected paired t-test.
Results: The in vitro contact test showed no survival in any tested species with CHX+CPC, while 3 species (L. casei, S. mitis and P. micros) were resistant to the
other 3 products. CHX and CHX+NaF demonstrated additional resistant species (3 and 4 species, respectively). The in vivo salivary bacterial counts test showed
higher reductions of CHX+CPC and CHX+ALC in aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, lasting for 5 h. Significant differences were detected at multiple time points, when
these two products were compared both with the control and the other tested products.
Conclusion: Important differences in activity, among 0.12% CHX products, were detected by both in vitro and in vivo tests. The formulation with alcohol was more active
than those without alcohol, excepting the formulation with CHX+CPC, in which the reformulation and addition of CPC, not only compensate but rather increase the
antimicrobial activity. *Supported by Dentaid.
3 Antimicrobial activity in saliva of four chlorhexidine mouthrinses
D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. Santacruz, A. O’Connor, M. Sanz. Antimicrobial activity in saliva of four chlorhexidine mouthrinses. Periodoncia 2001;11 (3): 193-202
Objective. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the microbiological efficacy of different mouthrinses containing 0.12% chlorhexidine in different
formulations, due to variations in the alcohol content, or due to the addition of other components (sodium fluoride, cetylpyridinium chloride).
Patients and methods. 10 student volunteers with similar ages and oral health participated. Both the researcher and the laboratory were blind to the products
studied. The design of the study was randomized, crossover with a one week washout period. After base evaluations and taking 1 ml non-stimulated saliva base
samples, each subject rinsed with 15 ml of the product for the duration of 1 minute. New samples were taken at 5 min, 1, 3, 5, and 7 hours. Samples were sent to the
laboratory, and were processed in two series, with aerobic (24 h), and anaerobic incubation (48 h). The products evaluated were: 0.12% chlorhexidine with alcohol
(CLX + ALC); 0.12% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride without alcohol (CLX + CPC); 0.12% chlorhexidine and sodium fluoride without alcohol (CLX
+ NaF); 0.12% chlorhexidine without alcohol (CLX); and a saline solution control. The number of colony forming units (CFU) was determined, and the data were
transformed into logarithms. Statistical comparisons were made using Student’s t test.
Results. The reductions in aerobic CFUs were significant compared to the control for all of the products evaluated, except for CLX + NaF. The differences in
anaerobic CFUs were significant compared to the control for all products, except for CLX + NaF. When comparing products, the best results were shown for CLX
+ ALC and for the CLX + CPC mouthrinse.
Conclusions: The mouthrinses containing 0.12% chlorhexidine were effective in reducing salivary flora, but showed important differences in their activity depending
on the composition. The entire composition of a mouthrinse significantly influences its effectiveness, independently of its active ingredient. *Supported by Dentaid.
4 Effect of different chlorhexidine formulations in mouthrinses on de novo plaque formation
M. Quirynen, P. Avontroodt, W. Peeters, M. Pauwels, W. Coucke, D. Van Steenberghe. Effect of different chlorhexidine formulations in mouthrinses on de novo
plaque formation. J Clin Periodontol 2001; 28: 1127-36
Background: Chlorhexidine (CHX) 0.2 % solution, still the golden standard as mouthrinse for the prevention of plaque formation and development of gingivitis,
has some limited side-effects such as extrinsic tooth staining, poor taste, taste disturbance, sensitivity changes in tongue, pain, and the content of alcohol. These
side effects led to the search of new formulations.
Methods: In this double-blind, randomised, cross-over study, 16 young dental students with a healthy periodontium, abolished all means of mechanical plaque
control during 4 experimental periods of 11 days (separated from each other by a washout period of 3 weeks). During each experimental period, they rinsed 2x
daily with one of the following mouthrinses in a randomised order: CHX 0.2 % + alcohol (Corsodyl®), CHX 0.12% + alcohol (Perio·Aid®), CHX 0.12 % + sodium
fluoride 0.05 % (Cariax Gingival®) and CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % (Perio·Aid®, new formulation). After 7 and 11 days of undisturbed plaque formation, clinical
parameters were recorded, questionnaires completed and plaque samples (supragingivally and saliva) collected.
Results: The CHX 0.12 % + alcohol and the CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % formulations were as efficient as the CHX 0.2 % mouthrinse in retarding de novo plaque
formation (proven by clinical observations as well as by anaerobic and aerobic culture data), and always superior (p<0.001) to the CHX 0.12 % + sodium fluoride
0.05 % solution. The subjective ratings were in favour of the new CHX formulation when compared with the other CHX formulations, especially for taste (p<0.05).
Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated the potential of a new CHX 0.12 % + CPC 0.05 % non-alcoholic formulation as an effective anti-plaque and
anti-inflammatory agent with reduced unpleasant subjective side-effects.
5 Comparison of 2 chlorhexidine mouthwashes on plaque regrowth in vivo and dietary staining in vitro
C. Mendieta, N. Vallcorba, A. Binney, M. Addy. Comparison of 2 chlorhexidine mouthwashes on plaque regrowth in vivo and dietary staining in vitro. J Clin
Periodontol 1994; 21: 296-300
Until recently, the few available chlorhexidine mouthrinse products have been 0.2% formulations. However, concentrations of 0.12% chlorhexidine appear as
effective as 0.2%, if the volume of the rinse is increased to 15 ml. Since the mere incorporation of chlorhexidine in a formulation does not guarantee availability
of the antiseptic, it would seem reasonable to evaluate or compare all products. This is particularly the case when other ingredients, such as fluoride are added.
The 1st study compared the effect of a 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse with a 0.12% chlorhexidine /0.022% sodium fluoride rinse for effects on plaque regrowth. The
study was a 7-day, blind, randomised, 2-cell cross-over design with a baseline control run in period, in which 18 subjects participated. Both chlorhexidine products
significantly reduced plaque compared to control but the chlorhexidine fluoride rinse was less effective than the chlorhexidine only rinse. The 2nd study assessed
the propensity of the chlorhexidine rinses to induce dietary staining in vitro. For the chlorhexidine fluoride rinse, this was less than the other 0.12% rinse and a
commonly used 0.2% product. The data in vivo and in vitro suggest reduced chlorhexidine availability from the chlorhexidine fluoride product which appears to
cause some loss of efficacy.
*Supported by Dentaid.
6 Efficacy of a gel dentifrice in the regrowth inhibition of supragingival bacterial plaque
C. Mendieta, A. Ramírez, I. Conde, F. Matas, M. Comella, A. Quinteros, R. Puigmal. Efficacy of a gel dentifrice in the regrowth inhibition of supragingival bacterial
13
BIBLIOGRAPHY
plaque. Periodoncia 1998 Vol. 8; (3) Fasc 2: 184-185
The goals of this investigation were: 1) to study the inhibitory effect on supragingival bacterial plaque growth of a gel containing 0.12% chlorhexidine digluconate
(Gel A), and 2) to- compare this antiplaque effect with that produced by a placebo gel, identical to the previous one but without chlorhexidine digluconate (Gel B).
This double blind randomized, crossover study with an intermediate washout period, was carried out on 20 volunteers. Supragingival bacterial plaque levels were
assessed by using the Quigley-Hein (Turesky modified) plaque index (IP). At the start of each treatment period, supragingival bacterial plaque was completely
removed (IP=0), and each subject was assigned either to treatment A (3 ml of Gel A), B (3 ml of Gel B) or C (10 ml of water, considered base). Each participant
spread the gel or the water over their entire dentition for 1 min. The treatment was carried out 2 times / day for 7 days as their only method of oral hygiene. Before
the crossover assignment, subjects carried out their regular oral hygiene for 72 hours. By the time the study was over, all participants had used all treatments
A, B and C. The analysis between groups was carried out using the multifactor analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of significance was set at a=0.05. Gel A
showed significant inhibition (p<0.001), when compared to base values (treatment C), on the regrowth of supragingival bacterial plaque. The effect of gel A was
statistically superior (p<0.0001) to that of gel B on all surfaces assessed. Plaque index values for gel B were identical to base values (p>0.05). The inhibiting effect
on plaque regrowth was variable depending on the surfaces assessed, with anterior teeth being 30% and posterior teeth being 24%. The effect of gel A was the
highest (41%) in the middle of the lingual/palatine surface of the anterior teeth.*Supported by Dentaid.
7 Clinical evaluation of a mouthrinse in supportive periodontal care
M.ESCRIBANO, S. MORANTE, I. GONZÁLEZ, D. HERRERA, and M. SANZ, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain.
Clinical evaluation of a mouthrinse in supportive periodontal care. Journal of Dental Research 2008; 87 (special issue),
Objectives: To evaluate the clinical activity and safety of a mouthrinse containing 0.05% cetyl-pyridinium chloride and 0.05% chlorhexidine in patients on
supportive periodontal care (SPC). Methods: This investigation was designed as a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. 34 subjects with
a history of chronic periodontitis patients and currently on SPC were selected on the bases of demonstrating an inadequate plaque control (Turesky index >1).
After a supragingival prophylaxis and oral hygiene reinforcement, they were asked to rinse twice a day for 3 months with either the test or placebo rinse. Primary
outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices (Turesky and Mühlemann-Son, respectively). Probing
pocket depths, bleeding on probing and probing attachment levels were also examined as secondary outcome variables. The appearance of undesirable side
effects, such as staining, burning feeling and soft-tissue irritation were also recorded. Outcome variables were compared by the ANCOVA test for the parametric
data and the chi-square test for the nominal data.
Results: Plaque index was significantly reduced in the test group (-0.68; confidence interval (CI): -0.96 to 0.39) while in the control group the plaque index
increased (+0.32; CI: +0.01 to +0.64). Differences between groups were statistically significant (p=0.0001). Bleeding on probing was also reduced in the test group
(-0.09), while it increased in the control group (+0.08), being the differences between groups statistically significant (p=0.01). The gingival index was reduced in
both groups, and no significant differences were detected between them. The same was true for changes in probing pocket depths. In regards to the safety of the
tested product, when compared with the placebo rinse, differences were found for tooth staining (p=0.07) and burning sensation (p=0.08).
Conclusions: The tested mouthwash demonstrated significant efficacy in reducing plaque and bleeding in patients undergoing SPC but demonstrating an
inadequate mechanical plaque control. Supported by Dentaid.
8 A randomized clinical trial on the short-term clinical and microbiological effects of the adjunctive use of a 0.05% chlorhexidine mouth rinse for
patients in supportive periodontal care.
S. Santos, D. Herrera, E. López, A. O’Connor, I. González, M. Sanz: A randomized clinical trial on the short-term clinical and microbiological effects of the adjunctive use of a
0.05% chlorhexidine mouth rinse for patients in supportive periodontal care. J Clin Periodontol 2004; 31: 45-51
Objective: To evaluate the clinical and microbiological activity of a new mouth rinse formulation, used as an adjunct to oral hygiene, for patients in supportive
periodontal care.
Patients and Methods: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial with two groups: test group, rinsing twice per day with the test product (with 0.05%
chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride); and control group, rinsing with a placebo. Treated chronic periodontitis patients were included, and two visits
were rendered, baseline, and after 15 days. Clinical outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices, and probing pocket depth. Subgingival samples were
processed by culturing. Patient-based variables and adverse effects were also assessed. Outcome variables were compared by t-test, X2, and Mann-Whitney test.
Results: The results belonged to 33 patients. Plaque and gingival indices, and the log of bacterial total counts were reduced in the test group (p<0.01), but differences
between groups were only statistically significant (p<0.05) for plaque and bacterial counts. A significant reduction in the proportions of flora (p<0.05) and frequency
of detection (p = 0.01) of Porphyromonas gingivalis was observed in the test group.
Conclusions: The newly formulated mouth rinse demonstrated short-term plaque inhibitory activity. This was associated with a reduction in the total load of
anaerobic subgingival microflora. *Supported by Dentaid.
9 Clinical and microbiological effect of a mouthrinse for patients in supportive care
S. Roldán, S. Santos, D. Herrera, A. O’Connor, I. González, M. Sanz. Clinical and microbiological effect of a mouthrises for patients in supportive care. Presented at
the IADR in Cardiff 2002 Aim: To evaluate the antiplaque and antigingivitis effect of a new mouthrinse, with low concentration of chlorhexidine, aimed to be used
during supportive periodontal care. Additionally, the microbiological effects were assessed.
Material and Methods. The study was designed as a clinical trial, randomized, parallel, prospective, placebo-controlled, with two groups: test group, with rinsing
twice per day with the tested product (Perio·Aid Maintenance®, containing 0.05% CHX and 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride); control group, with an identical
vehicle without the active ingredients). 33 treated chronic periodontitis patients were included, and 2 visits were rendered, baseline, and 15 days. Clinical outcome
variables included plaque indexes (Turesky and Dichotomous), gingival indexes (Mulheman & Son, Silness & Löe). Subgingival samples for microbiological cultures
were taken from 4 selected sites, and pooled together. Clinical variables were compared by t-test, both for intra and inter group comparisons. Microbiological
variables were assessed by t-test, chi-square (frequency of detection of pathogens), and Mann-Whitney test (proportion of flora of pathogens).
Results. Results belonged to 33 patients (17 in test group, 16 in control group). Turesky index was reduced in the test group (de 1.10 a 0.71, p=0.005), and
differences between groups were statistically significant (p=0.02). The same was true for the dichotomous index (intra group p<0.001; inter group p=0.007).
Gingival indexes were also improved in the test group (Mulheman&Son, p=0.01; Silness & Löe, p=0.009), but inter groups differences were not significant.
The log of bacterial total counts was reduced in the test group (from 6.02 to 5.34, p=0.01), while minor changes occurred in the control group (from 5.84 to 5.92).
Inter group differences reached the level of significance (p=0.01). Moreover, it was observed in the test group a significant reduction in the proportions of flora
(p<0.05) and frequency of detection
(p=0.01) of P. gingivalis.
Conclusions. The newly formulated mouthrinse, with a low CHX concentration, demonstrated antiplaque (both intra and inter group), and antigingivitis activity
(intra group). This was associated with an effect on the subgingival microflora, reducing the total load and the proportions and frequency of detection of P.
gingivalis.
Supported by Dentaid, Spain.
10 Microbiological effect of mouth-wash in supportive therapy
S. Santos, D. Herrera, S. Roldán, I. González, M. Sanz. Microbiological effect of mouth-wash in supportive therapy. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 (Suppl 4): 17
Aim: To evaluate microbiological effects on the subgingival microflora of a new mouth-rinse, developed to help in the supportive therapy of periodontitis patients.
Patients and methods: This was a clinical trial, randomized, parallel, with two groups: test group, rinsing twice per day with Perio·Aid Mantenimiento® [0.05%
chlorhexidine (CHX) and 0.05% cetylpyridinium (CPC)]; control group, with a placebo. Patients treated with chronic periodontitis were included, and two visits
were rendered, baseline and 15 days. Subgingival samples for microbiological cultures were taken from four selected sites, as well as clinical variables. Different
statistical tests were used: t-test, chi-square and Mann-Whitney test.
Results: Results belonged to 32 patients. The dichotomous plaque index showed a significant reduction (P < 0.001) in the test group, and a significant difference
between groups (P = 0.015) was detected. Bleeding on sampling depicted a significant (P = 0.001) reduction in the test group. Bacterial total counts were
significantly reduced (P = 0.015) in the test group. Inter-group comparison detected significant differences (P = 0.017). Significant reductions, in the frequency of
detection (P = 0.011) and proportions of flora (P = 0.049) of P. gingivalis, were observed in the test group.
Conclusions: The test product clearly affected the subgingival microflora, by significantly reducing the total counts, and the frequency of detection and proportions
of flora of P. gingivalis.
Conclusions: Supported by Dentaid, Spain.
11 Mouth-rinses after initial therapy of periodontitis
C. Soers, C. Dekeyser, D. van Steenberghe, M. Quirynen. Mouth-rinses after initial therapy of periodontitis. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30 (Suppl 4): 17
Aim: A double-blind, randomized, clinical trial evaluated the long-term effect of two mouth-rinses: Corsodyl® (chlorhexidine 0.2% + alcohol = CHX/alc) and
14
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Perio·Aid Maintenance® (chlorhexidine 005% + cetylpyridinium chloride 0.05% and no alcohol = CHX/CPC) during maintenance therapy, in comparison to a
placebo. The study enrolled three parallel groups; this interim report is based on eight patients/group.
Methods: In 24 periodontitis patients, a full-mouth one-stage therapy (FMOS) was completed in 24 h. Besides daily mechanical plaque control, each patient rinsed
two times per day with one of the three rinses (10 mL for 1 min), during 6 months. Periodontal parameters were recorded at 0, 1, 3 and 6 months. Microbial culturing
(plaque and saliva) took place at 0,3 and 6 months.
Results: The subgingival microbial load showed a significant treatment (FMOS) effect and only insignificant improvements with any of the two active rinses. The
plaque indices showed significant additional improvements (P < 0.05) with the two rinses when compared to placebo. For the bleeding indices an additional effect
of active rinses became significant only at month 6. Staining differences were noticed, especially at month 3 for CHX/alc.
Conclusion: Considering the side effects, CHX/CPC rinse may be an alternative for CHX/alc during maintenance therapy.
Acknowlegement: This study was partially supported by Dentaid (Spain).
12 A 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride / 0.05% chlorhexidine formulation as mouthrinse during maintenance phase after initial periodontal
therapy
M. Quirynen, C. Soers, M. Desnyder, C. Dekeyser, M. Pauwels, D. van Steenberghe. A 0.05% cetylpyridinium chloride / 0.05% chlorhexidine formulation as
mouthrinse during-maintenance phase after initial periodontal therapy. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2005; 32: 390-400
Background: Chlorhexidine mouthrinse/spray (CHX) can still be considered the golden standard in the chemical prevention of plaque formation and development
of gingivitis. The product unfortunately has some side-effects, such as extrinsic tooth staining, poor taste, taste disturbance, sensitivity changes in tongue, pain, and
irritation because of the alcohol content. These side effects led to the search of new formulations.
Methods: In this double-blind, randomised, long-term, parallel study 48 moderate periodontitis patients rinsed for 6 months (starting immediately after a “onestage, full-mouth” disinfection) with one of the following products: CHX 0,2% + alcohol (Corsodyl®), CHX 0.05% + CPC 0.05% and no alcohol (Perio·Aid®
Maintenance, a new formulation), or the placebo of the latter. After 1, 3 and 6 months a serious of clinical and microbiological parameters were recorded for the
supra and subgingival area as well as for saliva.
Results: Although the significant treatment impact (mechanical debridement) in all groups, both CHX solutions further decreased both plaque and gingivitis
indices (p < 0.001 and p< 0.05, respectively), when compared to placebo. This was also reflected by additional reductions in the number of CFU/ml of aerobic
and especially anaerobic species and by a suppression of S. mutans (versus an overgrowth for the placebo), in all niches. Differences between both CHX solutions
were never encountered. The subjective ratings were slightly in favour of the new CHX-CPC formulation when compared with the other CHX-alcohol formulation,
especially for taste of the product (p < 0.05), but less impressive for the staining of teeth and tongue.
Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrated the potential of a new CHX 0.05% + CPC 0.05% non-alcoholic formulation as an effective anti-plaque and
anti-inflammatory agent for long-term use with reduced subjective side effects. *Supported by Dentaid.
13 Efficacy of a low-concentration chlorhexidine mouth rinse in non-compliant periodontitis patients attending a supportive periodontal care
programme: a randomized clinical trial
Escribano M, Herrera D, Morante S, Teughels W, Quirynen M, Sanz M. Efficacy of a low-concentration chlorhexidine mouthrinse in non-compliant periodontitis
patients attending a supportive periodontal care programme: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 2010; 367(3): 266-275
Objective: To assess the clinical and microbiological efficacy of a 0.05% chlorhexidine and 0.05% cetyl-pyridinium chloride mouth rinse in supportive periodontal
care (SPC) in patients with inadequate plaque control.
Material and Methods: The study was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with moderate to severe chronic periodontitis
under SPC with an inadequate plaque control (Turesky index >1). After supragingival prophylaxis and oral hygiene reinforcement, participants rinsed twice a day
for 3 months with the test or placebo solutions, in addition to conventional hygiene. Primary clinical outcome variables included plaque and gingival indices. As
secondary outcomes, periodontal and microbiological variables were studied. ANCOVA and x2 tests were used to compare the variables.
Results: Forty-seven patients (22 placebo and 25 test group) participated. After 3 months, plaque levels increased in the placebo group, while diminished in
the test group (po0.001). Similar effects were found for bleeding on probing. The other clinical parameters did not show significant differences. Microbiological
variables demonstrated inter-group significant reductions in subgingival counts of Fusobacterium nucleatum and Prevotella intermedia and a decrease of the
total bacterial counts in saliva.
Conclusions: The tested mouth rinse demonstrated efficacy in reducing plaque and gingivitis, as well as in decreasing the microbial load in saliva and gingival
sulcus.
14 Plaque inhibition of two commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses
Van Strydonck DAC, Timmerman MF, van der Velden U, van der Weijden GA: Plaque inhibition of two commercially available chlorhexidine mouthrinses. J Clin
Periodontol 2005; 32: 305–309.
Background: The aim of the present study was to assess the effect on plaque inhibition and taste perception of two commercially available mouthrinses (0.12% CHX
non-alcohol base with 0.05% cetyl pyridinium chloride (Cpc) versus 0.2% CHX alcohol base). Methods: The study was designed as a single-blind, randomized two
group parallel experiment, to compare two different commercially available mouthrinses, during a 3-day plaque accumulation model. Forty healthy volunteers were
enrolled in the study and received a thorough dental prophylaxis at the beginning of the test period. Over a 72-h experimental non-brushing period, during which
subjects abstained from all forms of mechanical oral hygiene, one group (test) used a 15ml alcohol free 0.12% CHX (518 mg) mouthrinse on a Cpc base (Perioaids,
CHX Cpc), twice daily for 30 s. The other group (control) used a 10ml 0.2% CHX (520 mg) mouthrinse on an 11.8% ethanol alcohol base (Corsodyls, CHX Alc), twice
daily for 60 s. After 72 h of plaque formation, the amount of plaque was evaluated. By the use of visual analogue scale, the subjects were asked for their appreciation
of the taste of the mouthrinse they had used.
Results: The mean plaque index for the CHX Cpc group was 0.97 and for the CHX Alc group 0.78. After 72 h of non-brushing, there was no significant difference in
plaque accumulation between the two groups. The answers to the questions (taste perception and after-taste) showed a statistically significant difference between
the two groups. The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for taste appreciation on a scale from very bad to very good taste (0–10) were 5.92 for the CHX Cpc
group and 4.10 for the CHX Alc group (p50.02). The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for the after-taste on a scale from very short to very long (0–10) were
7.24 for the CHX Cpc group and 5.38 for the CHX Alc group.
Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present study design, it can be concluded that rinsing with a 0.12% CHX mouthrinse on a non-alcohol base with 0.05% Cpc
(Perio-Aids) is not significantly different from rinsing with a 0.2% CHX mouthrinse on an alcohol base (Corsodyls). It appears that the subjects appreciated the taste
of the non-alcohol CHX solution better but the after-taste of the rinse remained longer in the mouth.
15
Cleans all spaces for complete oral hygiene
Stem
• Plastic (poliuretane) covered stainless
steel wire protects gums and enamel.
• Does not damage implants or irritate
sensitive areas.
Bent tip
• For better access to posterior spaces.
Filaments
• Black Tynex® filaments: To detect
remaining bacterial plaque.
• White Tynex® filaments: To detect
bleeding.
Protective cap
• Protects and ensures optimal hygiene
of the filaments.
New bicoloured design
• To distinguish the handle grip area.
INTERPROX PHD sizes:
CONICAL
CONICAL
CYLINDRICAL
INDICATIONS
16
Interdental spaces
Adequate interdental hygiene
prevents the onset and
development of caries and
periodontal disease.
Implants
Cleaning the implant area helps
eliminate dental biofilm and maintain
optimal oral hygiene.
Diastemae
Wide spaces between teeth
require special attention to avoid
dental biofilm build-up.
Orthodontic appliances
Patients with orthodontic appliances
must increase their dental hygiene
efforts paying close attention to
the hard-to-reach areas: around
brackets, metal bands, wires and
gingival margins.
Fixed prostheses
Food debris tends to accumulate
around fixed bridges. Therefore,
proper oral hygiene is necessary
in these hard-to-reach areas.
Furcal areas
When gum recession occurs,
the uncovered furcal space is
exposed to food and can be filled
with dental biofilm, calculus and
bacterial debris.
*ISO 16409: International standard for manual interdental brushes
Gel
Cetylpyridinium chloride
Reduces biofilm accumulation
Sodium fluoride
Reinforces enamel
Zinc lactate
Increases the substantivity
of CPC, lengthening its
activity.
0.14%
Allantoin
Promotes healthy gums
0.10%
Presentations
0.3%
1450ppm
20ml
13
• Reduces dental biofilm build up
• Control bad breath
Toothpaste Mouthwash
Chlorhexidine digluconate
Efficiently fights dental biofilm
Cetylpyridinium chloride
Reduces biofilm accumulation
0.05%
0.05%
0.05%
1450ppm
_____
_____
0.14%
0.14%
0.14%
____
____
Sodium fluoride
Reinforces enamel
Zinc Lactate
Increases the substantivity of
CPC, lengthening its activity.
Xylitol
Moisturises oral cavity and
caries prevention.
Presentations
REFERENCES:
1.S. Roldán, E.G. Winkel, D. Herrera, M. Sanz, A.J. van Winkelhoff. The effects of a new mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride and zinc lactate on the microflora of oral halitosis patients:
a dual-centre, double-blind placebo-controlled study. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 427-434
2.E.G. Winkel, S. Roldán, A.J. van Winkelhoff, D.Herrera, M. Sanz. Clinical effects of a new mouthrinse containing chlorhexidine, cetylpyridinium chloride and zinc-lactate on oral halitosis. A dual-center, doubleblind placebo-controlled study. J Clin Periodontol 2003; 30: 300-306
3.D. Van Steenberghe, Pl Avontroodt, W. Peeters, M. Pauwels, W.Coucke, A. Lijnen, M.Quirynen. Effect of
different mouthrinses on morning breath. J Periodontol 2001; 72:1183-91
14
Spray
_____
10%
75ml
0.05%
0.05%
150ml/500ml
Tongue cleaner
Removes the
dental biofilm
that forms on
the tongue
surface.
15ml
4.S. Roldán, D. Herrera, M. Sanz, A.J. van Winkelhoff, E.G.Winkel et al. Estudio multicéntrico, paralelo y
controlado con placebo, de la efectividad a corto plazo, de un colutorio de nueva formulación, en el
tratamiento de halitosis oral:
- M. Sanz, S. Roldán, E.G. Winkel, A.J. van Winkelhoff, D. Herrera. Antimicrobial efficacy of an antiseptic
mouthrinse in the treatment of oral halitosis. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80-599
- S. Roldán, D. Herrera, I. González, M. Sanz. The effect of a specific therapeutic approach on the oral
microbial environment. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80:599
- E.G. Winkel, S. Roldán, A.J.van Winkelhoff, M. Sanz. The effect of cetylpyridinium chloride, chlorhexidine
and zinc lactate (Halita) on oral halitosis. J Dent Res (IADR Abstracts) 2001; 80:797
DENTAID XEROS GEL
For patients that need more
moisture.
DENTAID XEROS TOOTHPASTE
DENTAID XEROS MOUTHWASH
The daily use toothpaste that
helps moisturize the oral cavity.
The daily use mouthwash that
helps moisturize the oral cavity.
DENTAID XEROS SPRAY
Stimulates natural saliva
production.
Toothpaste Mouthwash
Betaine
Long-lasting moisturiser and osmotic
protective agent
Sodium fluoride Reinforces enamel
4.0%
1450ppm
_____
1.33%
Promotes healthy gums
Xylitol
Moisturises oral cavity and caries prevention
10.0%3.30%
Allantoin
Promotes healthy gums
0.10%
Malic acid
Stimulates natural saliva production; does
not erode enamel
Presentations
Consisting of phosphate ions, keeps pH from
dropping below 5.5 while tablets dissolve in
the mouth, preventing enamel erosion.
1.0%
Spray
_____
226ppm 15ppm226ppm
_____
_____
0.05%
Aloe Vera
Buffer system
Gel
0.10%
10.0%
_____
10.0%
_____
_____
_____
_____
1.0%
_____
_____
_____
_____
75ml
500ml
50ml
15ml
REFERENCES:
1. ADSP da Mata, DN da Silva Marques, JML Silveira, JROF Marques, ET de Melo Campos Felino, NFRPM Guilherme. Effects of gustatory stimulants of salivary secretion on
salivary pH and flow: a randomized controlled trial. Oral Diseases (2009) 15, 220-228.
15
DENTAID
technology
nanorepair ®
•
•
•
•
• Intense desensitising action
• Starts working from
the first application
Daily use
Helps to prevent tooth sensitivity
Reinforces enamel
Protects gums
NEW
Desensin Repair
Desensin Repair
0,45%
0,0125%
_____
5,00%
1450 ppm
1,0%
0,1%
0,30%
1,00%
226 ppm
0,5%
0,10%
_____
5,0%
1450 ppm
_____
_____
_____
_____
75ml
500ml
Toothpaste
Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles
Form a protective coat to prevent
dental sensitivity.
Potassium nitrate
Sodium fluoride
Pro-vitamin B5 (Panthenol)
Allantoin
Vitamin E
Prevents tooth sensitivity
Reinforces enamel
Protects gums
Promotes healthy gums
Protects gums
Presentations
REFERENCES:
1. Gil Loscos FJ, Fuenmayor Fernández V. Hipersensibilidad dentinaria: Causas y posibilidades de tratamiento. Periodoncia 1999; 9 (1): 69-76.
2. Navajas Rodríguez de Mondelo, JM. La interfase entre los tejidos dentales cavitados y el
material de restauración. En: Echevarría JJ, Cuenca E, editores. Manual de odontología.
Barcelona: Ed. Masson, 1998: 590-1.
3. Addy M. Etiología de la hipersensibilidad dentinal. In: Mendieta C, Coordinator. Hiperestesias dentinales. Barcelona: Dentaid S.A., 1997: 25-38.
4. García Barbero J, editor Fisiopatología dentaria. Patología y Terapéutica dental. Madrid:
Ed. Síntesis, 1997: 67-68
5. Matas F, Quinteros A, Mendieta C. Periodoncia para el práctico general. Periodoncia JulSep 1997; 7 (3): 181-190.
6. Herlofson BB, Barkvoll P. Oral mucosal desquamation caused by two toothpaste detergents
in an experimental model. Eur J Oral Sci 1996; 104: 21-6.
16
Mouthwash
Gel
75ml
7. Herlofson BB, Barkvoll P. Oral mucosal desquamation caused by two toothpaste detergents
in an experimental model. Eur J Oral Sci 1996; 104: 21-6.
8. Drake DR, Wiemann AH, Rivera EM, Walton RE. Bacterial retention in canal walls in vitro:
effect of Smear Layer. Journal of Endodontics 1994; 20 (2): 78-82.
9. Pashley DH. Over the counter dentifrices in the treatment of tooth hypersensitivity. Dental
Clin North Ame 1990; 34 (3): 466-7.
10. Kanapka JA. Over the counter dentifrices in the treatment of tooth hypersensitivity. Dental
Clin North Ame 1990; 34 (3): 545-560.
11. Clark DC, Hanley JA, Geoghean S, Vinet D. The effectiveness of a fluoride varnish and
a desensitizing toothpaste in treating dentine hypersensitivity. J Periodont Res 1985; 20:
212-6.
12. Tarbet WJ, Silverman G, Fratarcangelo PA, Kanapka JA. Home treatment for dentinal
hypersensitivity: A comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc 1982; 105 (2): 227.
VITIS
DESENSIN
Toothbrushes
VITIS soft access
VITIS soft
VITIS medium access
VITIS medium
VITIS hard access
VITIS hard
VITIS junior
VITIS gingival
VITIS sensitive
VITIS ultrasoft
VITIS surgical
VITIS perio
VITIS monotip
VITIS orthodontic access
VITIS orthodontic
VITIS implant/sulcular
VITIS implant brush
VITIS implant monotip
VITIS implant angular
Toothpastes
VITIS whitening toothpaste
VITIS aloe vera toothpaste
VITIS aloe vera toothpaste
VITIS aloe vera (apple-mint flavour)
toothpaste
VITIS gingival toothpaste
VITIS gingival toothpaste
VITIS Xtra Forte toothpaste
VITIS antiage toothpaste
VITIS orthodontic toothpaste
VITIS electric toothpaste
VITIS junior gel
VITIS aloe vera toothpaste
VITIS gingival toothpaste
VITIS antiage toothpaste
Mouthwashes
VITIS aloe vera mouthwash
VITIS aloe vera mouthwash
VITIS gingival mouthwash
VITIS gingival mouthwash VITIS Xtra Forte mouthwash VITIS orthodontic mouthwash VITIS whitening mouthwash • New products
500 ml
500ml
20 tablets
15ml
HALITA
Halita
Halita
Halita
Halita
Halita
Halita
tongue cleaner
mouthwash
mouthwash
spray
Forte spray
with Fluoride toothpaste
500 ml
150 ml
15 ml
15 ml
75 ml
INTERPROX
100ml
150ml
100ml
100ml
150ml
100ml
100ml
100ml
100ml
100ml
75ml
15ml
15ml
15ml
1000ml
300ml
1000ml
500ml
500ml
500ml
500ml
Plus
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Plus
Nano
Super micro
Super micro
Micro
Micro
Mini Conical
Mini
Mini
Conical
Maxi
X-Maxi
XX-Maxi
6U
10U
6U
10U
6U
6U
10U
6U
6U
6U
4U
4U
Access
Interprox Access Mini
Interprox Access Conical
Interprox Access Maxi
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Interprox
Super micro
6U
Micro18U
Micro6U
Mini Conical
6U
Mini18U
Mini6U
Cylindrical
6U
Conical6U
Maxi6U
Gel
Interprox Gel
20 ml
PERIO·AID
DentaidXeros
gel
toothpaste
mouthwash
spray
tablets
chewing gum
Mouthwashes
Desensin Plus mouthwash Desensin Repair mouthwash
Plac Control Plac Control liquid Orthodontic wax
VITIS Orthodontic wax
VITIS Orthodontic cleansing tablets
Xeros
Xeros
Xeros
Xeros
Xeros
Xeros
75 ml
75 ml
PLAC CONTROL
Flosses and tapes
VITIS dental floss
VITIS waxed dental floss
VITIS soft waxed dental floss
VITIS dental tape
VITIS waxed dental tape
VITIS threader
VITIS floss applicator
dentaid
dentaid
dentaid
dentaid
dentaid
dentaid
Toothpastes
Desensin Gel Desensin Repair toothpaste 50 ml
75 ml
500 ml
15 ml
90U
Perio
Perio
Perio
Perio
Perio
Perio
Perio
Perio
Aid
Aid
Aid
Aid
Aid
Aid
Aid
Aid
0,12% mouthwash
0,12% mouthwash
0,12% gel
0,12% spray
0,12% mouthwash
Maintenance mouthwash
Maintenance mouthwash
Maintenance mouthwash
500 ml
150 ml
75 ml
50 ml
5000 ml
1000 ml
500 ml
150 ml
For more information: www.dentaid.com
17
Index
DENTAID’S mission
2
VITIS toothbrushes4
VITIS implant6
VITIS gingival8
VITIS Orthodontic9
PERIO•AID
10
INTERPROX
12
HALITA
14
DENTAID XEROS
15
DESENSIN
16
DENTAID products17
22
WHEN SCIENCE AND
PROFESSIONAL
KNOW-HOW
COME TOGETHER
ORAL HEALTH IMPROVES
Covering all angles of oral health is a commitment that involves
collaborating with professionals. This is the only way to improve
oral health globally.
The Oral Health Experts
www.dentaid.com
24
1000285
Follow us on: