Comparative evaluation of human breast milk, bovine milk, and infant milk formula on cariogenicity in children: An in vivo study.

B V Thimma Reddy, B Uday Kumar Chowdary, J Raghavendra Kumar, R Hemanth Kumar, Veronica Gunde, Spandana Reddy Nagilla
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of human breast milk, bovine milk, and infant milk formula on cariogenicity in children: An in vivo study.","authors":"B V Thimma Reddy, B Uday Kumar Chowdary, J Raghavendra Kumar, R Hemanth Kumar, Veronica Gunde, Spandana Reddy Nagilla","doi":"10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_450_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the study was to compare the cariogenicity of human breast milk (HBM), bovine milk, and infant milk formulas.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Ninety children of 1-4 years were randomly selected according to the type of milk they consume and were divided into five groups: Group I - HBM, Group II - cow milk, Group III - buffalo milk, Group IV - Lactogen 2, and Group V - Dexolac 4. Three parameters were assessed (salivary pH, plaque pH, and Streptococcus mutans count). Baseline salivary pH was measured, plaque sample was collected from children before feeding, and then, children were fed with milk. The second sample was collected after 45 min of feeding and the third sample after 3 h of second sample collection. Collected plaque samples were assessed for plaque pH and were sent to microbiological laboratory and cultured on blood agar. The intergroup comparison was done by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test. Intragroup comparison was done by one-way anova and Bonferroni test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant difference in intra- and intergroup comparisons of salivary pH was noted. However, with regard to plaque pH, there is a statistically significant difference in the second sample in Groups III, IV, and V. There was an increase in colony-forming units of S. mutans in plaque samples from baseline to the third sample in Groups IV and V.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lactogen 2 and Dexolac 4 showed greater cariogenic activity, buffalo milk is mildly cariogenic, whereas HBM and cow milk showed least cariogenicity.</p>","PeriodicalId":101311,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","volume":"41 4","pages":"274-281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_450_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the cariogenicity of human breast milk (HBM), bovine milk, and infant milk formulas.

Patients and methods: Ninety children of 1-4 years were randomly selected according to the type of milk they consume and were divided into five groups: Group I - HBM, Group II - cow milk, Group III - buffalo milk, Group IV - Lactogen 2, and Group V - Dexolac 4. Three parameters were assessed (salivary pH, plaque pH, and Streptococcus mutans count). Baseline salivary pH was measured, plaque sample was collected from children before feeding, and then, children were fed with milk. The second sample was collected after 45 min of feeding and the third sample after 3 h of second sample collection. Collected plaque samples were assessed for plaque pH and were sent to microbiological laboratory and cultured on blood agar. The intergroup comparison was done by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey test. Intragroup comparison was done by one-way anova and Bonferroni test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: No statistically significant difference in intra- and intergroup comparisons of salivary pH was noted. However, with regard to plaque pH, there is a statistically significant difference in the second sample in Groups III, IV, and V. There was an increase in colony-forming units of S. mutans in plaque samples from baseline to the third sample in Groups IV and V.

Conclusion: Lactogen 2 and Dexolac 4 showed greater cariogenic activity, buffalo milk is mildly cariogenic, whereas HBM and cow milk showed least cariogenicity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
母乳、牛乳和婴儿配方奶粉对儿童致龋性的比较评估:体内研究。
目的:该研究旨在比较人类母乳(HBM)、牛乳和婴儿配方奶粉的致龋性:根据儿童饮用的牛奶类型随机选取 90 名 1-4 岁儿童,将其分为五组:第一组为 HBM,第二组为牛奶,第三组为水牛奶,第四组为 Lactogen 2,第五组为 Dexolac 4。对三个参数(唾液 pH 值、牙菌斑 pH 值和变异链球菌计数)进行了评估。测量基线唾液 pH 值,在喂奶前收集儿童牙菌斑样本,然后用牛奶喂养儿童。喂奶 45 分钟后收集第二份样本,收集第二份样本 3 小时后收集第三份样本。收集的牙菌斑样本会被评估牙菌斑的酸碱度,并送往微生物实验室在血琼脂上进行培养。组间比较采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和Tukey检验。组内比较采用单因素方差分析和Bonferroni检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义:结果:唾液 pH 值的组内和组间比较差异无统计学意义。然而,在牙菌斑 pH 值方面,第三组、第四组和第五组第二次取样的差异有统计学意义。在第四组和第五组,从基线到第三次取样,牙菌斑样本中的变异单胞菌菌落形成单位有所增加:结论:乳清蛋白 2 和右旋乳酸 4 的致龋活性较高,水牛奶的致龋性较低,而 HBM 和牛奶的致龋性最低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Challenges faced by dentists during provision of oral health care in children and adolescents with special health-care needs: A scoping review. Comparative evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy of various intracanal medicament in young permanent teeth: An in vivo study. Comparison of intranasal ketamine with intranasal midazolam and dexmedetomidine combination in pediatric dental patients for procedural sedation: A crossover study. Effect of oil pulling on the Streptococcus mutans concentation in plaque around orthodontic brackets -A prospective clinical study. Effect of silver diamine fluoride application on the microtensile bond strength of three commonly used restorative materials in primary teeth: An ultrastructural study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1