Abstract
Objectives
To compare short‐term changes in the photographed percentage of visible tooth surface covered by pre‐existing dental calculus among dogs receiving additive‐free baked treats, sodium hexametaphosphate‐containing treats or pomegranate–propolis‐containing treats, and to describe pooled supragingival bacterial profiles before and after the intervention. A fixed‐side brushing procedure was additionally explored from day 9 onward.
Materials and Methods
Twelve adult dogs (four per group) were enrolled in a 19‐day exploratory pilot study and randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups: additive‐free baked dental treats, baked dental treats containing 0.6% sodium hexametaphosphate or baked dental treats containing a 0.6% pomegranate–propolis blend. Dogs received two treats daily throughout the study. A fixed‐side tooth‐brushing protocol was applied from day 9 onwards, with the right dental arch brushed daily and the left arch left unbrushed for within‐dog comparison. Photographed dental calculus coverage was assessed at predefined time points using standardised image analysis. Pooled supragingival bacterial profiles were descriptively characterised at baseline and day 19 by 16S rRNA gene sequencing.
Results
Photographed dental calculus coverage declined in all treatment groups over the 19‐day study. The largest mean descriptive reduction was observed in dogs receiving baked dental treats containing the pomegranate–propolis blend, followed by sodium hexametaphosphate and additive‐free baked dental treats. A greater descriptive reduction in photographed dental calculus coverage was observed on the brushed right dental arch after day 9. Exploratory analysis of pooled supragingival bacterial profiles showed descriptive differences in the relative abundance of bacterial taxa between baseline and day 19.
Clinical Significance
In this 19‐day exploratory study, photographed dental calculus coverage declined in dogs receiving all three baked‐treat formulations. The largest mean descriptive reduction occurred in the pomegranate–propolis group, followed by the sodium hexametaphosphate and additive‐free groups. Because the study included four dogs per treatment, no group without a baked treat, a fixed right‐side brushing protocol and pooled microbiome samples without biological replication, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary. Larger randomised studies beginning after standardised dental prophylaxis and using individual microbiome samples are required to determine preventive efficacy and clinical relevance.