ArticleOral health & preventive dentistry2026
Comparison of the Effect of Simulated Gastric Acid on the Surface Properties of Different Fluoride-Releasing Dental Restorative Materials.
Article in Oral health & preventive 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEating disorders such as bulimia and anorexia negatively impact on oral health due to repeated exposure to gastric acid, leading to dental erosion and deterioration of restorative materials. Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement (RMGIC), Giomers and glass hybrid may offer greater resistance in these adverse environments. This study aimed to compare the effect of simulated gastric acid on the surface properties of different fluoride-releasing composite materials. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn in-vitro experimental study was conducted using disks of RMGIC (Gold Label Light-Cured Universal Restorative; G1_GLLC), Giomer (Beautifil II; G2_BFII), and glass hybrid (EQUIA Forte Fil; G3_EF), prepared according to manufacturers' instructions. Surface roughness, fluoride release and solubility were evaluated before and after 18 h of immersion in simulated gastric acid. Additionally, surface morphology was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Student's t-test (p 0.05).
resultsG1_GLLC exhibited the highest increase in surface roughness after immersion (0.38 ± 0.25 µm), while G2_BFII demonstrated lower changes in surface roughness (0.17 ± 0.16 µm) and the lowest fluoride release (0.001 ppm) and solubility (0.93%). G3_EF showed the highest solubility (5.50%), indicating greater susceptibility to acidic environments.
conclusionThe surface roughness, fluoride release, and solubility of all tested materials were affected by simulated gastric acid. Giomer (G2_BFII) proved to be a suitable alternative in a highly acidic oral environment, as it remains stable and releases fluoride under acidic conditions compared to RMGIC (G1_GLLC) and glass hybrid (G3_EF).
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.