ArticleBrazilian dental journal2026
Acid erosion, surface topography, and fluoride release of glass ionomer cements subjected to erosive challenge.
Article in Brazilian dental journal, 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
To evaluate and compare the acid erosion resistance, surface topography, and fluoride release of restorative glass ionomer cements (GICs) subjected to erosive challenge. Specimens (n=6) of Vidrion R® (VD), Maxxion R® (MA), Vitro Molar® (VM), and GlasIonomer FX ULTRA® (GI) were prepared and stored in water at 5°C/24h. Baseline measurements of thickness, weight, and surface roughness (linear - Ra; volumetric - Sa) were obtained using a non-contact 3D profilometer. Specimens were immersed in 30 mL of a lactic acid buffer (pH 2.74) at 37°C/24h, after which final thickness (eroded depth), mass (eroded mass), and surface roughness were measured. Fluoride release was evaluated in duplicate using a calibrated fluoride-specific electrode. Data were analyzed using Jamovi 2.2.5 (p<0.05). All GICs showed a reduction in thickness; however, only VM exhibited an eroded depth below 0.17 mm (0.10 ± 0.03 mm, per ISO standards). Regarding mass loss, VD experienced the highest reduction and VM the lowest (p<0.05), with GI and MA showing similar losses (p>0.05). Regarding surface roughness, VD showed a reduction in Ra, whereas the other GICs showed increases (p>0.05). All specimens demonstrated a significant increase in Sa, with MA showing the greatest change (p<0.05). In fluoride release, MA and VD had the highest values (98.6 ± 11.8 and 91.4 ± 8.16), GI was intermediate (66.1 ± 4.12), and VM had the lowest (38.4 ± 9.97) (p<0.05). Although all products released fluoride and underwent significant changes in thickness, mass, and surface roughness under erosive challenge, only VM demonstrated adequate acid erosion resistance according to ISO standards.
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.