What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to compare the remineralization potential of fluoride-free biomimetic agents and fluoride toothpaste on subsurface enamel.

July 26, 2026BiomimeticsOpen Access

Biomimetic Strategies for Subsurface Enamel Remineralization: Depth-Dependent Effects of Biomimetic Agents Compared with Fluoride

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Randomized trial compares enamel remineralization in molars using biomimetic agents versus fluoride, indicating effectiveness varies by depth.

This research aims to compare the remineralization potential of fluoride-free biomimetic agents and fluoride toothpaste on subsurface enamel.
Seventy extracted human mandibular molars were allocated to five groups (n = 14).
Artificial carious lesions were induced, followed by a 14-day pH-cycling treatment.
Cross-sectional microhardness was assessed at varying depths and analyzed with ANOVA and post hoc tests.
Demineralization decreased microhardness significantly at all depths (p < 0.05).
At 30 µm, nHAp, CPP-ACP, and fluoride performed similarly, while BAG had lower recovery.
At 100-150 µm, nHAp showed the highest recovery, followed by CPP-ACP and BAG, with fluoride showing the least.

Dede et al. (2026) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Randomized trial compares enamel remineralization in molars using biomimetic agents versus fluoride, indicating effectiveness varies by depth.