Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34083707›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Anti-demineralizing protective effects on enamel identified in experimental and commercial restorative materials with functional fillers.

Matej Par, Andrea Gubler, Thomas Attin, Zrinka Tarle, Tobias T Tauböck

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Matej ParDepartment of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gunduliceva 5, Zagreb, Croatia. mpar@sfzg.hr.
Andrea GublerDepartment of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas AttinDepartment of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich, Switzerland.
Zrinka TarleDepartment of Endodontics and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Gunduliceva 5, Zagreb, Croatia.
Tobias T TauböckDepartment of Conservative and Preventive Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Plattenstrasse 11, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHUniversity of Zagreb · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether experimental and commercial dental restorative materials with functional fillers can exert a protective anti-demineralizing effect on enamel that is not immediately adjacent to the restoration. Four experimental resin composites with bioactive glass and three commercial restorative materials were investigated. Enamel blocks were incubated in a lactic acid solution (pH = 4.0) at a standardized distance (5 mm) from cured specimens of restorative materials. The lactic acid solution was replenished every 4 days up to a total of 32 days. Surfaces of enamel blocks were periodically evaluated by Knoop microhardness measurements and scanning electron microscopy. The protective effect of restorative materials against acid was identified as enamel microhardness remaining unchanged for a certain number of 4-day acid addition cycles. Additionally, the pH of the immersion medium was measured. While enamel microhardness in the control group was maintained for 1 acid addition cycle (4 days), restorative materials postponed enamel softening for 2-5 cycles (8-20 days). The materials capable of exerting a stronger alkalizing effect provided longer-lasting enamel protection. The protective and alkalizing effects of experimental composites improved with higher amounts of bioactive glass and were better for conventional bioactive glass 45S5 compared to a fluoride-containing bioactive glass. Scanning electron micrographs evidenced the protective effect of restorative materials by showing a delayed appearance of an etching pattern on the enamel surface. A remotely-acting anti-demineralizing protective effect on enamel was identified in experimental composites functionalized with two types of bioactive glass, as well as in three commercial ion-releasing restorative materials.

Indexed as

Cariostatic AgentsChemical PhenomenaComposite ResinsDental EnamelHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationMaterials TestingSurface PropertiesTooth DemineralizationCariostatic AgentsComposite Resins

Identifiers

PMID34083707
PMCPMC8175467
OpenAlexW3165342351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.