ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Evaluation of the Remineralizing Potential of Fluoridated and Non-fluoridated Agents on Demineralized Primary Tooth Enamel: An In Vitro Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomimetic Enamel Remineralization in Pediatric Dentistry: From Biological Principles to Clinical Evidence.Cureus · 2026Review
- Tetracycline Enables Visualization of Remineralization Induced by Agents Penetrating Dental Enamel.Calcified tissue international · 2026Article
- Remineralization potential of fluoridated and non-fluoridated toothpastes on induced dental caries: A comparativeBioinformation · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDental caries remains a highly prevalent condition in children, with primary teeth being particularly susceptible due to their lower mineral content and structural characteristics. Early intervention using remineralizing agents can reverse enamel demineralization and prevent disease progression. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the remineralizing efficacy of various fluoridated and non-fluoridated agents on the surface microhardness (SMH) of demineralized primary tooth enamel. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis in vitro experimental study was conducted on 50 extracted, caries-free primary molars, randomly divided into five groups as Group 1, who received casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) paste (GC Tooth Mousse®, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) (n = 10); Group 2, who was treated with nano-hydroxyapatite (nano-HA) toothpaste (Perfora™, Perfora Oral Care Pvt. Ltd., India) (n = 10); Group 3, who received grape seed extract solution (
resultsPost-remineralization analysis revealed statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.002). The paired t-test showed that Groups 1 and 4 exhibited the most significant microhardness improvement. Group 2 showed moderate efficacy, whereas Groups 3 and 5 showed no significant remineralization effects. Post-hoc analysis confirmed the superior performance of Groups 1 and 4 compared to Group 5.
conclusionCPP-ACP and NaF demonstrated superior remineralization potential in demineralized primary enamel. Nano-HA showed moderate efficacy, whereas grape seed extract and saline were ineffective. These findings support the use of fluoridated and non-fluoridated agents in pediatric preventive dentistry.
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.