ReviewJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2026
Retention of fluoride in the oral cavity: A randomized clinical study with nanoencapsulated fluoride toothpaste.
Review in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To evaluate in vivo fluoride retention in saliva and dental biofilm after the use of experimental toothpaste containing nanoencapsulated fluoride (NanoF). Material and Methods: A triple-blind randomized clinical study involving sixty-one residents from a municipality without fluoridated drinking water. The toothpastes used in the study were: Group 1 (1100 ppm, 100% NanoF); Group 2 (1100 ppm, 50% free NaF + 50% NanoF); and Group 3 (1100 ppm, 100% free NaF). During the use of the toothpaste, samples of dental biofilm and stimulated saliva were collected. Collection times were 1 and 2 hours (h) post-brushing for biofilm, and 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60 minutes, and 2h for saliva. The fluoride [F] concentrations in saliva and dental biofilm were analyzed using a specific electrode through the hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDS) facilitated diffusion technique. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman, and Wilcoxon tests (p<0.05). Results: The values of the area under the curve (AUC) for saliva over 0-60 minutes were: G3 (97.74) > G2 (84.73) > G1 (54.98). For dental biofilm, the highest fluoride [F] concentration was observed in G1 (35.26 mg/kg), followed by G3 (34.06 mg/kg) at the 1-hour mark; at 2 hours, the results were 24.88 mg/kg and 31.43 mg/kg, respectively, with a significant reduction in [F] observed only in G1 (p=0.02). Conclusions: The nanoencapsulated fluoride tested in this study exhibited a distinct pattern of fluoride release in saliva. However, in dental biofilm, the release pattern was similar to that of the free fluoride formulation (NaF).
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.