ArticleBDJ open2025
Comparative effect of Antivet®, Oplasture®, and a prototype paste on color change and microhardness of simulated stained enamel: an in vitro study.
Article in BDJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07707349 (The Effectiveness of Antivet Versus Opalustre® for the Management of Enamel Fluorosis/Discolored Enamel and Its Impact on Aesthetic Outcomes. A Randomized Controlled Trial), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
The Effectiveness of Antivet Versus Opalustre® for the Management of Enamel Fluorosis/Discolored Enamel and Its Impact on Aesthetic Outcomes. A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMicro-abrasion enables conservative stain removal with tooth preservation, enhancing color and microhardness in line with minimally invasive dentistry principles. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the effects of three micro-abrasion materials Antivet®, Oplasture®, and a prototype paste (37% phosphoric acid with Aluminum oxide powder) against an untreated control on the color stability and microhardness of simulated stained enamel surfaces. METHODS AND MATERIAL: A total of 120 extracted, caries-free human teeth were utilized. The teeth were randomly allocated into four groups (n = 30). Group 1 (control, no treatment), Group 2 (Antivet®: 21% hydrofluoric acid (HF)), Group 3 (Oplasture®: 6.6% hydrochloric acid (HCl) with silicon carbide), and Group 4 (prototype paste: 37% phosphoric acid with aluminum oxide powder). Specimens were stained by immersion in coffee or cola solutions at 37 °C for 8 h daily over 5 days, with interim storage in artificial saliva, and further subdivided (n = 15) by staining type. Color analysis and microhardness testing were performed at baseline, post-staining, and post-treatment. Data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, Levene's test, one-way ANOVA, and Holm's method for multiple comparisons.
resultsStatistically significant differences in enamel color change (ΔE) were observed among micro-abrasion materials versus control (p < 0.001), with the prototype paste inducing the highest ΔE after staining. Only Antivet® showed solution-dependent ΔE differences (p = 0.035). Enamel microhardness decreased significantly post-staining, confirming demineralization. Oplasture® achieved the greatest microhardness recovery, while Antivet® and the prototype paste were moderately effective. The control group exhibited the highest microhardness loss, after cola exposure (p = 0.045), highlighting the protective effect of micro-abrasive treatments.
conclusionsAll tested micro-abrasive materials effectively enhanced tooth color and enamel microhardness. Antivet® appears to be a viable alternative to hydrochloric acid-based products. The prototype paste emerged as a promising, cost-effective alternative for stain management.
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.