. 2019 Feb 4;9:1285. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-37580-w

Table 1.

Comparison of enamel subsurface lesion parameters before and after remineralisation in vitro (pH 5.6) and in situ as measured by TMR.

	Treatment	LDd (µm)^a	ΔLD (µm)^b	∆Zd (vol% min.µm)^c	∆Zd-∆Zr (vol% min.µm)^d	%Remin^e
In vitro	CPP-ACP + NaF	124.6 ± 18.6	23.5 ± 12.8	3587.0 ± 923.9	1259.8 ± 370.8^A	35.0 ± 5.4^A
	CPP-ACP + SnF₂	127.4 ± 20.5	30.2 ± 17.6	3784.6 ± 1398.7	1757.1 ± 757.8^A	46.1 ± 5.8^A
	p-value ^§	NS > 0.05	NS > 0.05	NS > 0.05	<0.05	<0.0001
In situ	NaF	103.6 ± 10.9	2.0 ± 3.5^abc	2728.9 ± 578.8	291.4 ± 48.6^abc	10.8 ± 0.8^abc
	SnF₂	97.6 ± 6.9	5.0 ± 3.8^de	2273.3 ± 294.5	245.4 ± 43.4^def	10.8 ± 0.8^def
	CPP-ACP	105.8 ± 6.9	10.8 ± 1.2^a	2729.2 ± 427.6	367.2 ± 68.0^adgh	13.4 ± 1.0^adgh
	CPP-ACP + NaF	103.4 ± 8.1	12.5 ± 7.0^bd	2742.4 ± 490.1	670.2 ± 102.8^begi	24.6 ± 2.1^begi
	CPP-ACP + SnF₂	104.3 ± 6.3	15.0 ± 2.9^ce	2527.5 ± 449.1	776.6 ± 159.9^cfhi	30.6 ± 1.6^cfhi
	p-value ^ǂ	NS > 0.05	<0.0001	NS > 0.05	<0.0001	<0.0001

^aLDd = lesion depth after demineralisation, ^bΔLD = reduction in lesion depth after remineralisation, ^cΔZd = integrated mineral loss prior to remineralisation, ^dΔZd-ΔZr = gain in mineral content after remineralisation; ^e%R = percent remineralisation ((ΔZd-ΔZr/ΔZd) * 100%). Displayed as mean ± standard deviation. ^§ǂANCOVA (α = 0.05) NS not significant. Differences between means were measured using post hoc multiple comparison tests on the marginal means using a Sidak adjustment: ^AabcdefghiValues in the same column similarly marked are significantly different (p < 0.05).