ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Antibacterial and Bioregenerative Nanomaterials in Oral Health: From Material Design to Clinical Translation and Technological Trends.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Green-SynthesizedJournal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Applications of Nanomaterials in Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics: A Narrative Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Self-Reported Practices Regarding Modern Adhesive Systems Among Romanian Dentists: A Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Decision-ready evidence for vital pulp therapy: a network meta-analysis of bioactive materials in mature permanent teeth.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
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
contextThe increasing incidence of secondary caries and the failure of restorations have intensified research into dental restorative materials capable of actively interacting with the oral environment. In this context, antibacterial and bioregenerative nanomaterials have attracted growing scientific interest due to their potential to inhibit biofilm formation while simultaneously supporting mineral repair processes.
objectiveThis narrative review analyzes recent developments in nanostructured materials for restorative dentistry and oral health applications, with particular emphasis on antibacterial agents, bioactive systems, and emerging dual-function approaches that integrate multiple biological functions into restorative materials. SCOPE OF THE REVIEW: The analyzed literature indicates that metallic nanoparticles, cationic monomers, and natural nanopolymers can reduce bacterial adhesion and metabolic activity under experimental conditions. In parallel, bioactive nanomaterials such as nanohydroxyapatite, bioactive glass, and calcium phosphate-based systems have demonstrated the ability to release remineralizing ions and to promote mineral deposition at the tooth-material interface. Dual-function hybrid materials aim to combine these antibacterial and bioregenerative effects within a single restorative system. Interpretative Perspective: Despite these advances, most available evidence derives from in vitro and preclinical studies, with significant heterogeneity across experimental models, evaluation methods, and outcome variables. This variability limits direct comparisons between studies and necessitates a cautious interpretation of claims regarding long-term antibacterial efficacy, functional tissue regeneration, and routine clinical applicability.
conclusionsAntibacterial and bioregenerative nanomaterials represent a relevant and continuously evolving research direction in restorative dentistry. Their successful clinical translation will depend on establishing standardized testing protocols, conducting comprehensive safety assessments, and generating clinically relevant evidence supporting long-term efficacy and biological compatibility. Their successful clinical translation will depend on establishing standardized testing protocols, conducting comprehensive safety assessments, and generating clinically relevant evidence supporting long-term efficacy and biological compatibility.
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.