Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: This in-vitro study compared the remineralization potential of two non-fluoridated herbal toothpastes (Meswak and Babool) with a fluoride-based toothpaste (Colgate Strong Teeth, CST) on artificially created white spot lesions in permanent teeth. Vickers Microhardness (VMH), Quantitative Light-Induced Fluorescence (QLFTM) and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) were used to assess remineralization. Methods: Fluorescence loss (ΔF) was obtained by demineralizing enamel specimens made from the buccal surfaces of extracted maxillary incisors or premolars. Demineralizing solution, artificial saliva and remineralizing solution were prepared according to standard protocols. For twenty-one days, the specimens were subjected to pH cycling. At baseline and 21 days later, VMH was assessed. QLFTM imaging was carried out at 7, 14 and 21 days and SEM analysis of surface morphology was conducted on one randomly selected specimen from each group. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 22.0. Intragroup comparisons were assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA and intergroup comparisons were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc test (p < 0.05). Results: The mean Vickers hardness number increased significantly in all groups from baseline to day 21 (p < 0.05). There were notable distinctions between the treatment and control groups, whereas no significant difference was found among Meswak, Babool and CST. ΔF values showed significant intergroup differences at days 14 and 21. SEM analysis demonstrated mineral deposition in all toothpaste groups. Conclusion: After 21 days, Babool and Meswak demonstrated remineralization capacity comparable to CST within the limitations of this in-vitro investigation. Key Findings: Herbal toothpastes Meswak and Babool demonstrated remineralization potential comparable to fluoride-based CST, with all three groups showing significant improvement in enamel microhardness over 21 days and no significant difference among them.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gehlot et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: