ArticleBMC oral health2026
Adjunctive effect of dentifrices on the durability of in-office desensitizing treatment under erosive-abrasive conditions.
Article in BMC oral health, 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
backgroundThis study evaluated the effects of dentifrices on dentin permeability, surface roughness, dentinal tubule occlusion, and dentin chemical composition after in-office desensitizing treatment and an erosive-abrasive challenge.
methodsHuman dentin specimens were treated with fluoride varnish and randomly allocated to five groups according to dentifrice used: fluoride-free (WF), sodium fluoride (NaF), fluorocalcium phosphosilicate (FCPS), arginine + calcium carbonate (AC), and NovaMin
resultsFluoride varnish reduced dentin permeability in all groups (T1 vs. T0; p < 0.05). After erosive-abrasive challenge, permeability increased in all groups except FCPS. No differences among dentifrices were observed for permeability (P > 0.05) or surface roughness (P ≥ 0.33). Morphological analysis showed lower tubule number, area, and perimeter in FCPS and NM groups (P < 0.05). Qualitative FTIR suggested greater preservation of phosphate-related bands in FCPS and NM; however, no differences were observed in the phosphate-to-amide I ratio (P = 0.72).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this in vitro study, dentifrices influenced the durability of in-office desensitizing treatment under erosive-abrasive conditions. FCPS demonstrated greater stability over time, while FCPS and NovaMin
Indexed as
Identifiers
42888404What 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.