ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Comparative Efficacy of Novel Biomimetic Remineralising Technologies.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of remineralizing dentifrices against caries lesions: A systematic approach.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the effectiveness of different remineralization agents on primary and permanent teeth exposed to acidic liquids: a randomized controlled in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- In Vitro Investigation of Novel Peptide Hydrogels for Enamel Remineralization.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of remineralizing efficacy of strontium-doped bioactive glass, BioMin, and NovaMin containing dentifrice on artificial white spot lesions after chlorhexidine pretreatment - AnJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2024Article
- Comparative evaluation of remineralization potential of novel bioactive agents on eroded enamel lesions: A single-blindedJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Biomimetic technologies for the remineralisation of enamel subsurface lesions (ESLs) have been developed and include: fluorocalcium phosphosilicate bioglass (BG/F); casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP−ACP) and with fluoride (CPP−ACFP); and self-assembling oligopeptide P11-4 (SAP). The aim of this study was to compare the remineralisation of ESLs in vitro using these technologies. Human enamel slabs with ESLs were cut into two half-slabs; one half-slab was untreated (control), and the other half was treated by exposure to one of the four technologies with artificial saliva (AS) or AS alone for 14 days at 37 °C. The technologies were applied to the ESL surface according to the manufacturer’s instructions. At the completion of each treatment, the treated half-slabs and their paired control half-slabs were embedded, sectioned and the mineral content was determined using transverse microradiography. The change in mineral content (remineralisation) between treatments was statistically analysed using one-way ANOVA. The order from highest to lowest remineralisation was CPP−ACFP (52.6 ± 2.6%) > CPP−ACP (43.0 ± 4.9%) > BG/F (13.2 ± 2.5%) > SAP (5.8 ± 1.6%) > AS (2.1 ± 0.5%). Only CPP−ACFP and CPP−ACP produced remineralisation throughout the body of the lesions. All four biomimetic technologies had some effect on the remineralisation of ESLs; however, CPP−ACFP with calcium, phosphate and fluoride ions stabilised by CPP was superior in the level and pattern of remineralisation obtained.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.