ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
Salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with experimental toothpaste containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioactivity and potential applications of surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler-containing dental materials for geriatric oral health: A scoping review.The Japanese dental science review · 2025Review
- Effect of Glass Ionomer Filler Size on Fluoride Release, Antiplaque Properties, and Abrasive Effects of Toothpaste.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-blind 9 case comparative studies were conducted to evaluate salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing using experimental toothpaste containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) fillers. Preliminary tests were conducted in order to determine the volume of usage as well as the concentrations (wt %) of S-PRG filler. Based on the results given these experiments, we compared the salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with 0.5 g of 4 different types of toothpastes: 5 wt % S-PRG filler, 1400 ppm F AmF (amine fluoride), 1500 ppm F NaF (sodium fluoride), and MFP (monofluorophosphate) containing toothpaste.
methodsOf the 12 participants, 7 participated in the preliminary study and 8 in the main study. All participants brushed their teeth using the scrubbing method for 2 min. At first, 1.0 and 0.5 g of 20 wt % S-PRG filler toothpastes were used to compare, then followed by 0.5 g of 0 (control), 1, and 5 wt % S-PRG toothpastes, respectively. The participants spat out once and rinsed with 15 mL of distilled water for 5 s. Saliva was collected for 3 min each at different time intervals of 0 (baseline), 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 120, and 180 min after the rinsing. Fluoride concentrations were determined using a fluoride electrode, and the area under the salivary clearance - time curve (AUC: ppm‧min) of each toothpaste was calculated as the salivary fluoride retention. The main study was then conducted to evaluate the salivary fluoride concentrations as well as the AUC value using 0.5 g of 5 wt % S-PRG filler toothpaste, followed by NaF, MFP, and AmF toothpastes.
resultsSince there were no statistical differences between using 1.0 and 0.5 g of 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes in salivary fluoride concentrations as well as the AUC value throughout the 180 min measurement, the volume was set as 0.5 g for the following studies. Concentrations of 5 and 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes retained 0.09 ppm F or more in saliva even after 180 min. No statistical differences were seen in the salivary fluoride concentrations at any time intervals as well as the AUC value between 5 and 20 wt % S-PRG toothpastes. Based on these results, the concentration of 5 wt % S-PRG toothpaste was used for the main comparative study. MFP toothpaste resulted in by far the lowest salivary fluoride concentrations (0.06 ppm F at 180 min) and the AUC value (24.6 ppm‧min), whereas 5 wt % S-PRG toothpaste (0.15 ppm F at 180 min, 92.3 ppm‧min) displayed retention on par with AmF toothpaste which appeared to result in higher values (0.17 ppm F at 180 min, 103 ppm‧min), compared to NaF toothpaste (0.12 ppm F at 180 min, 49.3 ppm‧min).
conclusionsThe salivary fluoride concentrations following toothbrushing with 0.5 g of 5 wt % S-PRG filler containing toothpaste showed retention similar to the best performing 1400 ppm F AmF toothpaste even 180 min after toothbrushing.
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.