CPP-ACP vs Placebo paste without CPP-ACP (fluoride toothpaste control): Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), fluorescence loss
CPP-ACP toothpaste did not differ significantly from placebo paste (fluoride control) for white spot lesion remineralization on QLF (MD 0.08, 95% CI -0.91 to 1.08; ungraded).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
CPP-ACP paste (casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate; e.g., Tooth Mousse/MI Paste) vs Placebo paste without CPP-ACP (fluoride toothpaste control) Quantitative light-induced fluorescence (QLF), fluorescence loss · Patients with early enamel white spot lesions (children/adolescents, ages 2.5-18 years) · 4 weeks to 1 year, Clinical (patients with white spot lesions) CPP-ACP toothpaste did not differ significantly from placebo paste (fluoride control) for white spot lesion remineralization on QLF (MD 0.08, 95% CI -0.91 to 1.08; ungraded). Evaluation of the efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate on remineralization of white… (2019) All outcomes | MD 0.08 [-0.91, 1.08] | 2 studies · 129 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of the efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate on remineralization of white spot lesions in vitro and… 2019 All outcomes | May 20, 2019 | 12 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Effect of CPP-ACP Paste on Enamel Carious Lesion of Primary Upper Anterior Teeth Assessed by Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence: A… · 2015 · included by 1 of these review
- Treatment of post-orthodontic white spot lesions with casein phosphopeptide-stabilised amorphous calcium phosphate · 2010 · included by 1 of these review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.