ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effectiveness of CPP-ACP and fluoridated toothpastes in preserving enamel microhardness after erosion and abrasion challenges at different time intervals.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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.
- Dental Erosion Management: From Remineralization to Emerging Regenerative Approaches-A Narrative Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Innovative dentifrices based on bioactive silica for enamel remineralization and erosion control: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the impact of fluoridated (1450 ppm F⁻) and CPP-ACP (MI Paste) toothpastes applied after different time points following erosive-abrasive challenge on the perseverance of enamel hardness. MATERIALS AND
methodsEnamel specimens were subjected to an erosive-abrasive model using erosive beverage and toothbrushing simulation. The erosive challenge was achieved by soaking the specimens in Coca-Cola for 2 min. Distilled water was used as a control. Then, the specimens were subjected to brushing using fluoridated and CPP-ACP dentifrices applied via a brushing simulation device. The waiting time between the erosive and abrasive challenges was investigated at four levels (0, 15, 30, 60 min). The Vickers' microhardness values of enamel at baseline and after the erosive-abrasive challenge were analyzed. Paired t-test and ANOVA analyzed the data.
resultsFollowing brushing with distilled water and fluoridated toothpaste, a significant reduction in enamel microhardness was observed at all time points (before vs. after) (P < 0.01). Brushing with CPP-ACP toothpaste achieved significant enamel microhardness reduction at 0 min (P < 0.001) and 30 min (P = 0.007). The erosive challenge and the toothpaste type were significant factors (P < 0.001) in modulating the enamel microhardness but not the waiting time (P = 0.149). There were significant interactions between the erosive challenge and the waiting time (P = 0.005), the toothpaste time and the waiting time (P < 0.001), and there was a significant interaction between the three variables (P = 0.005). CPP-ACP and fluoridated toothpastes resulted in less microhardness reduction compared to brushing using distilled water (P < 0.05), with no difference between CPP-ACP and fluoridated toothpastes.
conclusionThis study found that both fluoridated and CPP-ACP toothpastes are equally effective in protecting enamel, and delaying toothbrushing offers no protective benefits after such exposure. Delaying toothbrushing did not provide any protective benefits for enamel following exposure to the erosive-abrasive model, as fluoridated and CPP-ACP toothpastes were effective in protecting the enamel hardness.
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.