Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28064349›Full record

Trial reportClinical oral investigations2017

In situ effect of enamel salivary exposure time and type of intraoral appliance before an erosive challenge.

Fernanda Lyrio Mendonça, Maisa Camillo Jordão, Franciny Querobim Ionta, Marília Afonso Rabelo Buzalaf, Heitor Marques Honório, Linda Wang, Daniela Rios

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Effect ofJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fernanda Lyrio MendonçaDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-101, Brazil.
Maisa Camillo JordãoDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-101, Brazil.
Franciny Querobim IontaDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-101, Brazil.
Marília Afonso Rabelo BuzalafDepartment of Biological Sciences, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, SP, Brazil.
Heitor Marques HonórioDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-101, Brazil.
Linda WangDepartment of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Dental Materials, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, SP, Brazil.
Daniela RiosDepartment of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Alameda Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla, 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-101, Brazil. daniriosop@yahoo.com.br.
Universidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2013/15765-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study tested the effect of enamel salivary exposure time prior to an acid challenge (30 min, 1, 2, or 12 h) and type of intraoral appliance (palatal or mandibular) on initial erosion.

methodsAfter initial surface hardness evaluation, enamel blocks (n = 340) were randomly divided into groups and volunteers (n = 20). The control group was not exposed to saliva previously to the erosive challenge. The volunteers wore palatal and mandibular appliances simultaneously. After salivary exposure, the blocks were subjected to acid exposure by immersion in hydrochloric acid (0.01 M, pH 2.3) for 30 s. Then, the enamel surface hardness was evaluated. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis and Tukey's test (p < 0.05).

resultsNo difference was observed on percent surface hardness change (% SHC) in the enamel blocks between the types of intraoral appliances. Exposure to saliva for 30 min and 1 h promoted similar enamel resistance to the erosive attack, which was similar to the control group for both appliances. Blocks exposed to saliva for 2 h showed less hardness loss when compared to 30 min. Keeping the blocks in saliva during 12-h overnight resulted in similar percentage of enamel hardness loss compared to 2 h.

conclusionsA 2-hour in situ exposure to saliva is adequate to promote partial protection against initial erosive lesions, independently of the type of intraoral appliance used. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This finding will help researchers in the development of erosion studies, which will provide information for dentists to offer a better treatment for erosion.

Indexed as

Orthodontic AppliancesAdultCross-Over StudiesDental EnamelFemaleHardness TestsHumansHydrochloric AcidMaleSalivaSingle-Blind MethodSurface PropertiesTime FactorsTooth ErosionHydrochloric AcidAcquired enamel pellicle formationDental enamelSalivaTooth erosionTooth remineralization

Identifiers

PMID28064349
OpenAlexW2571236255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.