ArticleScientific reports2024
Protective effect of various toothpastes and mouthwashes against erosive and abrasive challenge on eroded dentin: an in vitro study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protective effects of herbal toothpastes against dentin erosion: an in vitro study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Intraoral applicability of plasma-activated water: antibacterial activity, cytotoxicity, and effects on tooth structure.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Erosive Effects of Freshly Squeezed Local Fruit Juices on Human Dental Enamel and Consumption Patterns Among Malaysian Adults.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Remineralizing Treatments for Dental Erosion and Sensitivity in Patients Suffering from Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD): Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Impact of Toothbrushing on Oral Health, Gingival Recession, and Tooth Wear-A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aimed to compare various toothpastes and mouthwashes on permanent tooth dentin after erosive and abrasive challenges. 130 sound premolars dentin were randomly submitted to an initial erosive challenge and a cycle of erosive and abrasive challenges for five days. The five experimental groups (n = 26) were: (1) Control group (artificial saliva), (2) Elmex erosion protection toothpaste and mouthwash, (3) Vitis anticaries biorepair toothpaste and mouthwash, (4) Oral B Pro-expert toothpaste and Oral B Fluorinse mouthwash, and (5) MI Paste ONE toothpaste and Caphosol mouthwash. Microhardness, surface roughness values, and the topographical characteristics of the dentin surface were assessed. The highest percentage of recovered dentin microhardness (%RDMH) value was observed in groups 2 and 4, followed by groups 5 and 3, respectively. The %RDMH values in groups 2 and 4 did not demonstrate a significant difference (p = 0.855). The highest percentage of improvement in surface roughness was recorded in groups 2 and 4, with no significant differences (p = 0.989). The atomic force microscopy (AFM) findings were consistent with the surface roughness data. The best recovery of dentin microhardness and roughness were measured with the Elmex and Oral B toothpaste and mouthwash, followed by MI Paste ONE toothpaste and Caphosol mouthwash and Vitis anticaries biorepair toothpaste and mouthwash.
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.