Table 1. ΔAF and P values obtained via LSCM before and after remineralization.
| Lesions morphous | Experimental group | Number of specimens (n) | ΔAF (x ¯±s.d.) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erosive lesion | GCE | 8 | −10.28±1.71 | 0.004 |
| Remineralization solution | 8 | −6.20±1.31 | 0.002 | |
| DDW | 8 | 14.11±1.14 | — | |
| Subsurface lesion | GCE | 8 | −21.77±3.04 | 0.000 |
| Remineralization solution | 8 | −7.22±2.40 | 0.020 | |
| DDW | 8 | 4.84±0.92 | — |
AF, average fluorescence; DDW, deionized water; GCE, Galla chinensis extract; LSCM, laser scanning confocal microscope.
The level of remineralization of the erosive lesion by Galla chinensis extract was lower than that of the subsurface lesion (P<0.05). No significant difference was found for the erosive lesion remineralized by GCE and the remineralization solution (P>0.05).