Cited by 33

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

Demineralization of Human Dentine Compared with Enamel in a pH-Cycling Apparatus with a Constant Composition during De- and Remineralization Periods

Herkströter, F.M., Witjes, M., Arends, J.·2009·Caries Research

Abstract

A comparison was made between the demineralization of enamel and dentine with and without abraded surfaces. This was done in a pH-cycling experiment for different demineralization/remineralization ratios – in the range from 1:1 to 1:4 – and for different fluoride additions (up to 2 ppm) in solution. A new automatic pH-cycling system, in which the de- and remineralization solutions have a constant composition during the de- and remineralization cycles, was used to create mineral loss in human dentine and enamel. Changes in mineral content were monitored by means of longitudinal microradiography. A linear correlation was found between the amount of mineral lost and the total demineralization time for both dentine and enamel. The demineralization rates were comparable for abraded enamel and dentine and for polished enamel and dentine, and this rate was roughly doubled by the removal of the outer surface for both tissues. This showed that the presence of the outer surface is equally important to dentine and enamel. Under the pH-cycling conditions used, a logarithmic relation was found between the addition of fluoride and the decrease in demineralization for both enamel and dentine. The inhibitory effect of fluoride on demineralization was most pronounced on abraded enamel, followed by pumice-polished enamel, abraded dentine and pumice-polished dentine. About 2 ppm fluoride was needed under the conditions used to stop enamel demineralization completely; in the case of dentine, however, this amount of added fluoride did not inhibit demineralization.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000261385

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Herkströter, F. M., Witjes, M., & Arends, J.
Venue
Caries Research
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2009-11-18
Pages
317-322
ISSN
  • 0008-6568
  • 1421-976X
Cited by
33
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review