Skip to main content
. 2025 Jan 2;16:58. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-54785-y

Fig. 6. Repair of demineralized enamel using GCPC in harsh environment.

Fig. 6

SEM images of the enamel repaired by GCPC under oscillation condition (80 rpm) for 30 min (A, B), 24 h (C, D) and 48 h (E, F). Inset: the boundary between GCPC treatment (blue) and non-treatment areas. Microhardness of different enamel samples after repair for 30 min (G) and 24 h (H). Sound, etched, 2 wt% NaF, CPP-ACP, GCPC, and 3X-GCPC correspond to the samples of sound enamel, etched enamel (blank group), enamels repaired by 2 wt% NaF, CPP-ACP paste, GCPC and 3X-GCPC in static artificial saliva respectively; Harsh GCPC represents the enamel repaired by GCPC under oscillation condition. Statistical differences are assessed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s multiple comparisons test. The asterisk (*) denotes significant differences between the indicated group and the etched group (p values higher than 0.001 are displayed above the asterisks). The error bars represent the mean ± SD for n = 3 independent experiments, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001; no data were excluded from the analyses.