Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T18:59:11.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dental and metabolic effects of lactitol in the diet of laboratory rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

T. H. Grenby  and
A. Phillips
T. H. Grenby
Affiliation:
Department of Oral Medicine and Pathology, United Medical and Dental Schools, Guy's Hospital, LondonSEI 9RT
A. Phillips
Affiliation:
Department of Oral Medicine and Pathology, United Medical and Dental Schools, Guy's Hospital, LondonSEI 9RT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Because so little is known about the properties of lactitol as a possible alternative bulk sweetener to sucrose, it was tested in two large-scale experiments in laboratory rats. Matched groups of caries-active Osborne-Mendel rats were fed on uniform diets containing lactitol and compared with a sucrose control in both experiments, plus a xylitol control in the first experiment.

2. In the early stages of the experiments weight gains and food utilization were better on the sucrose than on the lactitol regimens. Body-fat storage was higher on the sucrose than on the polyol regimens.

3. At the end of 8 weeks the mandibular molars were examined for dental plaque accumulation and dental caries. The dental caries scores when 160 g sucrose/kg in the diet was replaced by lactitol were lower by a highly significant margin, bringing them down to the same low level as those on a 160 g xylitol/kg regimen.

4. Testing lactitol in a manufactured food product, shortbread biscuits, in comparison with ordinary sucrose biscuits, showed differences in plaque scores (significant) and caries levels (highly significant), with 60% fewer lesions on the lactitol regimen.

5. The results confirm the low cariogenic potential of lactitol, but show metabolic differences compared with sucrose.

Type
Nutrient Substitutes
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , January 1989 , pp. 17 - 24
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1989

References

den Uyl, C. H. (1987). Technical and commercial aspects of the use of lactitol in foods as a reduced calorie bulk sweetener. In Developments in Sweeteners, Vol. 3, pp. 65–81 [Grenby, T. H. editor]. London: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
Folch, J., Lees, M. & Sloane-Stanley, G. H. (1957). A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipids from animal tissues. Journal of Biological Chemistry 226, 497–509.Google Scholar
Grenby, T. H. (1987). The nutritive properties and dental decay potential of snack foods. Frontiers of Gastrointestinal Research 14, 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grenby, T. H. (1988). Dental effects of Lycasin® in the diet of laboratory rats. Caries Research 22, 288–296.Google Scholar
Grenby, T. H. & Bull, J. M. (1977). Three ways of making sweet biscuits less harmful to the teeth. In Developments in Food Carbohydrate, Vol. 1, pp. 169–183 [Birch, G. G. editor]. London: Applied Science.Google Scholar
Grenby, T. H. & Desai, T. (1988). A trial of lactitol in sweets and its effects on human dental plaque. British Dental Journal 164, 383–387.Google Scholar
Grenby, T. H. & Paterson, F. M. (1972). Effects of sweet biscuits on the incidence of dental caries in rats. British Journal of Nutrition 27, 195–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
GrenbyT. H., T. H., & Paterson, F. M. (1972). Effects of sweet biscuits on the incidence of dental caries in rats. British other bulk sweeteners in vitro. Caries Research (In the Press).Google Scholar
Havenaar, R. (1987). Dental advantages of some bulk sweeteners in laboratory animal trials. In Developments in Sweeteners, Vol. 3, p. 189–211 [Grenby, T. H. editor]. London: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
Havenaar, R., Huis in 't Veld, J. H. J., Backer Dirks, O. & De Stoppelaar, J. D. (1978). Some bacteriological aspects of sugar substitutes. In Health and Sugar Substitutes, Proceedings of ERGOB Conference, Geneva, pp. 192–198 [Guggenheim, B. editor]. Basel: Karger.Google Scholar
Imfeld, T. N. (1983). Identification of Low Caries Risk Dietary Components, pp. 127. Basel: Karger.Google ScholarPubMed
Linke, H. A. B. (1986). Sugar alcohols and dental health. World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics 47, 134–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linke, H. A. B. (1987). Sweeteners and dental health: the influence of sugar substitutes on oral microorganisms. In Developments in Sweeteners, Vol. 3, pp. 151–188 [Grenby, T. H. editor]. London: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar
Shaw, J. H., Schweigert, B. S., McIntyre, J. J., Elvehjem, C. A. & Phillips, P. H. (1944). Dental caries in the cotton rat. I. Methods of study and preliminary nutritional experiments. Journal of Nutrition 28, 333–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Hoeven, J. S. (1986). Cariogenicity of lactitol in program-fed rats. Caries Research 20, 441–443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziesenitz, S. C. & Siebert, G. (1987). The metabolism and utilisation of polyols and other bulk sweeteners compared with sugar. In Developments in Sweeteners, Vol. 3, pp. 109–149 [Grenby, T. H. editor]. London: Elsevier Applied Science.Google Scholar