ReviewDentistry journal2026
Dental Amalgam and Oral Biological Responses: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence.
Review in Dentistry journal, 2026. 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.
- Inflammation-Driven Epithelial Plasticity in Oral Mucosa Adjacent to Long-Term Restorative Materials: A Retrospective Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Oral Epithelial Remodeling Associated with Long-Term Contact with Conventional Coronal Dental Amalgam Restorations: A Retrospective Histopathological and Immunohistochemical Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental amalgam remains widely used in restorative dentistry due to its durability and cost-effectiveness, yet concerns persist regarding potential biological effects related to mercury release. This narrative review critically synthesizes current evidence on oral mucosal alterations and salivary biomarker changes reported in association with amalgam restorations. Experimental research supports biological plausibility for oxidative and inflammatory responses to mercury exposure; however, most human evidence derives from observational studies demonstrating heterogeneous associations rather than consistent causal relationships. Reported variations in salivary biomarkers, including interleukin-8 and ceruloplasmin, are generally modest and influenced by confounding factors such as periodontal status, smoking, and systemic inflammation. Histopathological findings adjacent to amalgam restorations include epithelial and inflammatory changes, though many are nonspecific and comparable to other chronic irritative conditions. Overall, current clinical and epidemiological data do not indicate uniform or clinically significant adverse effects in the general population attributable solely to dental amalgam. Regulatory phase-down initiatives primarily reflect environmental and precautionary policies. Available evidence supports a balanced and evidence-based interpretation of amalgam-related biological findings in contemporary dental practice.
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.