ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2026
Protective and remineralizing capacity of biosilicate, chitosan-based material, and fluoride on demineralized and irradiated enamel.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the protective and remineralizing capabilities of biosilicate, chitosan, and fluoride on demineralized enamel, pre- and post-radiotherapy (RT). Enamel samples (n = 180) underwent artificial caries process (ACP) and 70 Gy irradiation. They were divided into ten groups (n = 18): Biosilicate Suspension Pre-RT (G1), Post-RT (G2); Biosilicate Gel Pre-RT (G3), Post-RT (G4); Chitosan Gel Pre-RT (G5), Post-RT (G6); Fluoridated Gel Pre-RT (G7), Post-RT (G8); Caries Control + RT (G9); No Caries Control + RT (G10). Knoop microhardness and surface roughness were measured pre- and post-ACP and post-treatment. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) evaluated topography. Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) and Raman Spectroscopy assessed chemical composition. ACP caused enamel prism disruption. G10 had the highest microhardness and lowest roughness (p < 0.05). G3 and G5 performed better pre-RT; G4 and G8 performed better post-RT. SEM and AFM showed surface protection and particle deposition in the treated groups. No significant chemical differences were found in EDS and Raman analyses. Biosilicate and partially preserved enamel microhardness and offered protective effects, alongside fluoride. These materials may benefit head and neck cancer patients by forming a protective layer and preventing radiation-related enamel demineralization.
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.